------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com 2004-01-24 00:18 ------- Subject: Re: PR 13722 candidate fix
On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 00:47, Zack Weinberg wrote: > Re-revised patch. On the REG/SUBREG issue, I was looking at your latest patch. In the full context of the previous patch, I see you already handle most of these issues by having a default switch case that aborts. The only real issue I see here is in the POST_MODIFY code where you have + if (GET_CODE (XEXP (offset, 1)) == REG) ... + else if (INTVAL (XEXP (offset, 1)) < -256 + 8) which assumes without checking that the offset is a CONST_INT if it isn't a REG. I put in an abort to see if this ever happens, but I doubt that it does. There is also a possible issue where you call reg_overlap_mentioned_p, and then assume that we have registers without checking. However, since we are already calling ia64_split_tmode, and that aborts for subregs, I think this is actually safe optimization wise. I think this can only fail if you have rtl checking enabled, and we have a subreg, in which we get the abort before calling ia64_split_tmode instead of inside ia64_split_tmode which isn't a serious problem. I see you have another modified patch. I can try this when my current build finishes. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13722 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
