On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 10:27:33AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Could you make the expander handle it, instead? It's as simple as (after
> > the double-reg thing) add "if operands[1] is reg 0, force_reg operands[2]".
> > I'll do it if you prefer.
>
> Probably, because I'm not sure how this can work, as you cannot create new
> pseudos here.
Because you cannot during reload, or another reason? We always use LRA
on powerpc nowadays, and LRA can deal with this.
> > [ the patch is broken here ]
>
> It applies just fine for me though. But it could probably use add_operand
> instead of satisfies_constraint_I in the condition.
Only the first hunk (rs6000.md) applies, the rest is ignored (there is a
blank line here instead of a diff header).
add_operand would be better, yeah.
> > > /* { dg-do compile } */
> > > /* { dg-options "-fstack-limit-register=r2" } */
> >
> > Please use a different register, r2 already has different functions in
> > most ABIs. It *probably* will compile anyway, but :-)
>
> It's a straight copy of gcc.target/powerpc/pr48344-1.c though.
I see. We'll fix it :-)
Segher
