On 09/02/11 12:35, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On 1 September 2011 12:50, Bernd Schmidt <ber...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> Shrink-wrapping tests on ARM had one additional failure, which I could
>> track down to a stmfd instruction being emitted where an stmhifd was
>> intended. The following patch fixes the testcase; full tests running
>> now. Ok?
> 
> IIUC this should have been a result of conditionalizing the prologue
> saves by the CCFSM state machine in ARM state

Correct.

> given that the push
> instruction below doesn't have the conditional markers.

Although I'm not sure how you arrived at this? Thumb insns can't be
conditional anyway?

>  In which case
> the routines to emit the asm for the VFP registers( vfp_output_fstmfd?
> ) should also be checked for this issue.

Hmm, ok. I found two more places which looked suspicious. New version,
untested so far. What's "sfmfd"? That doesn't occur in my manual.


Bernd
        * config/arm/arm.md (push_multi): Emit predicates.
        (push_fp_multi): Likewise.
        * config/arm/arm.c (vfp_output_fstmd): Likewise.
Index: gcc/config/arm/arm.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/arm/arm.c        (revision 178135)
+++ gcc/config/arm/arm.c        (working copy)
@@ -13084,7 +13096,7 @@ vfp_output_fstmd (rtx * operands)
   int base;
   int i;
 
-  strcpy (pattern, "fstmfdd\t%m0!, {%P1");
+  strcpy (pattern, "fstmfdd%?\t%m0!, {%P1");
   p = strlen (pattern);
 
   gcc_assert (GET_CODE (operands[1]) == REG);
Index: gcc/config/arm/arm.md
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/arm/arm.md       (revision 178135)
+++ gcc/config/arm/arm.md       (working copy)
@@ -10581,14 +10581,14 @@ (define_insn "*push_multi"
        In Thumb mode always use push, and the assembler will pick
        something appropriate.  */
     if (num_saves == 1 && TARGET_ARM)
-      output_asm_insn (\"str\\t%1, [%m0, #-4]!\", operands);
+      output_asm_insn (\"str%?\\t%1, [%m0, #-4]!\", operands);
     else
       {
        int i;
        char pattern[100];
 
        if (TARGET_ARM)
-           strcpy (pattern, \"stmfd\\t%m0!, {%1\");
+           strcpy (pattern, \"stm%(fd%)\\t%m0!, {%1\");
        else
            strcpy (pattern, \"push\\t{%1\");
 
@@ -10631,7 +10631,7 @@ (define_insn "*push_fp_multi"
   {
     char pattern[100];
 
-    sprintf (pattern, \"sfmfd\\t%%1, %d, [%%m0]!\", XVECLEN (operands[2], 0));
+    sprintf (pattern, \"sfm%(fd%)\\t%%1, %d, [%%m0]!\", XVECLEN (operands[2], 
0));
     output_asm_insn (pattern, operands);
     return \"\";
   }"

Reply via email to