On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I have looked at example in rs6000.c, the only target that uses >> SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P. Looking at other sources, S_P_U_P is used >> in conjunction with SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR. It looks to me that using the >> combination should be OK to determine if subreg is correct. > > Attached patch adds paradoxical subreg handling. Patch is diffed vs. > current mainline. > > H.J., does it work for x32 branch? Does it make any difference? > > (BTW: You will need [1] from the trunk). > > [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01693.html >
I will give it a try. -- H.J.
