On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 09:31:52PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 07:50:33PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > > This patch fixes PR 64505, which is an issue that one of the users of the > > Advance Toolchain found where -m32 -mpowerpc64 generated an insn not found > > message in some cases. I traced this down to rs6000_secondary_reload > > generating a reload helper that uses a DImode scratch register, when in this > > case, it should use a SImode scratch register. > > That looks correct. > > > I think the patch is safe, but -m32 -mpowerpc64 is not legitimate for the > > Linux > > environment.
Yep, but even so, the compiler should not throw an insn not found error. > The high halves of the registers are clobbered by some signal things. > It works without problems otherwise; you can run the testsuite just fine > with -m32 -mpowerpc64. > > > + /* -m32 -mpowerpc64 needs to use a 32-bit scratch register. */ > > if (in_p) > > - sri->icode = CODE_FOR_reload_di_load; > > + sri->icode = ((TARGET_32BIT) ? CODE_FOR_reload_si_load > > + : CODE_FOR_reload_di_load); > > else > > - sri->icode = CODE_FOR_reload_di_store; > > + sri->icode = ((TARGET_32BIT) ? CODE_FOR_reload_si_store > > + : CODE_FOR_reload_di_store); > > You really like parentheses do you? :-) You could drop them all... The outer parenthesis is so that auto indent under emacs properly aligns the code. The parenthesis around the test for ?: is more of a style issue. -- Michael Meissner, IBM IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460-6245, USA email: meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com, phone: +1 (978) 899-4797
