On 04/06/2017 06:24 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Vladimir Makarov <vmaka...@redhat.com> wrote:

On 04/05/2017 12:07 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:


I'll correct the patch.

Here is the patch I've committed.
Note that in such contexts it's better to just use [u]int64_t.


You are right, Richard.  I've committed the following patch:

Index: ChangeLog
===================================================================
--- ChangeLog   (revision 246764)
+++ ChangeLog   (working copy)
@@ -1,5 +1,11 @@
 2017-04-07  Vladimir Makarov  <vmaka...@redhat.com>

+       PR rtl-optimization/70703
+       * ira-color.c (update_conflict_hard_regno_costs): Use
+       int64_t instead of HOST_WIDE_INT.
+
+2017-04-07  Vladimir Makarov  <vmaka...@redhat.com>
+
        PR rtl-optimization/70478
        * lra-constraints.c (process_alt_operands): Disfavor alternative
        insn memory operands.
Index: ira-color.c
===================================================================
--- ira-color.c (revision 246763)
+++ ira-color.c (working copy)
@@ -1522,7 +1522,7 @@ update_conflict_hard_regno_costs (int *c
                index = ira_class_hard_reg_index[aclass][hard_regno];
                if (index < 0)
                  continue;
- cost = (int) (((HOST_WIDE_INT) conflict_costs [i] * mult) / div);
+               cost = (int) (((int64_t) conflict_costs [i] * mult) / div);
                if (cost == 0)
                  continue;
                cont_p = true;

Reply via email to