Hi Richard,
On 16/03/16 21:25, Richard Henderson wrote:
This fixes only the regression described in the PR.
There was quite a bit of follow-up that points to new work that ought to
be done during the gcc7 cycle, but isn't really appropriate now.
Tested on aarch64-linux; committed as reviewed in the PR.
r~
@@ -4953,74 +4963,43 @@ aarch64_legitimize_address (rtx x, rtx /* orig_x */,
machine_mode mode)
if (GET_CODE (x) == PLUS && CONST_INT_P (XEXP (x, 1)))
{
- HOST_WIDE_INT offset = INTVAL (XEXP (x, 1));
- HOST_WIDE_INT base_offset;
+ rtx base = XEXP (x, 0);
+ rtx offset_rtx XEXP (x, 1);
I recently read the aarch64_legitimize_address function, and find a
suspicious line of code in the above change.
>> + rtx offset_rtx XEXP (x, 1);
It's committed by you. It looks like a typo, and an assignment seems
missing?
James suggests me this is c++ initialization. Ah, yes it is! But I
believe this is an coincident?
As you have different initialization code above.
I made an obvious patch to make it looks more intuitive, is it Okay?
Regards,
Renlin Li
gcc/changelog:
2016-06-06 renlin li <renlin...@arm.com>
* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_legitimize_address): Add assignment.
commit 1fd77baf4ca918ed25dbce4678d7be7b7cd51be2
Author: Renlin Li <renlin...@arm.com>
Date: Mon Jun 6 11:24:39 2016 +0100
fix type
diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
index ad07fe1..54e6813 100644
--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
@@ -4949,7 +4949,7 @@ aarch64_legitimize_address (rtx x, rtx /* orig_x */, machine_mode mode)
if (GET_CODE (x) == PLUS && CONST_INT_P (XEXP (x, 1)))
{
rtx base = XEXP (x, 0);
- rtx offset_rtx XEXP (x, 1);
+ rtx offset_rtx = XEXP (x, 1);
HOST_WIDE_INT offset = INTVAL (offset_rtx);
if (GET_CODE (base) == PLUS)
