http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44578
--- Comment #9 from Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google dot com> 2013-04-29 17:24:42 UTC --- It does fix the issue I had in this test case. But theoretically can't this pattern still generate an MMX reference in some cases? And I see other instances of the same constraint in i386.md - is there a larger issue here and how can we prevent this? Thanks! Teresa On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:13 AM, ubizjak at gmail dot com <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44578 > > --- Comment #8 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2013-04-29 > 17:13:30 UTC --- > Please try following patch, it fixes the testcase for me (note "!" for ?*y > alternative): > > --cut here-- > Index: i386.md > =================================================================== > --- i386.md (revision 198401) > +++ i386.md (working copy) > @@ -3049,10 +3049,10 @@ > > (define_insn "*zero_extendsidi2" > [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "nonimmediate_operand" > - "=r,?r,?o,r ,o,?*Ym,?*y,?*Yi,?*x") > + "=r,?r,?o,r ,o,?*Ym,?!*y,?*Yi,?*x") > (zero_extend:DI > (match_operand:SI 1 "x86_64_zext_operand" > - "0 ,rm,r ,rmWz,0,r ,m ,r ,m")))] > + "0 ,rm,r ,rmWz,0,r ,m ,r ,m")))] > "" > { > switch (get_attr_type (insn)) > --cut here-- > > -- > Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You are on the CC list for the bug.