Hi!
On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 02:36:20PM +0530, Ajit Agarwal wrote:
> * ree.cc (combline_reaching_defs): Add zero_extend
> using defined abi interfaces.
Typo. Also, please don't wrap lines early. Also, you are missing some
changes in this file in the changelog.
> (add_removable_extension): use of defined abi interfaces
> for no reaching defs.
Capital U.
> (abi_extension_candidate_return_reg_p): New defined ABI function.
What does that even mean? An "ABI function"?
> --- a/gcc/ree.cc
> +++ b/gcc/ree.cc
> @@ -473,7 +473,8 @@ get_defs (rtx_insn *insn, rtx reg, vec<rtx_insn *> *dest)
> break;
> }
>
> - gcc_assert (use != NULL);
> + if (use == NULL)
> + return NULL;
If it is suddenly allowed to have nil here, some comment somewhere needs
to change as well.
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..1d443af066a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.target/powerpc/zext-elim-3.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +/* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc*-*-* } } } */
This is required of all file in g++.target/powerpc/ already:
# Exit immediately if this isn't a PowerPC target.
if {![istarget powerpc*-*-*] } then {
return
}
so please don't repeat that here.
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */
Is that required?!
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_p9vector_ok } */
> +/* { dg-options "-mcpu=power9 -O2 -free" } */
Why does this need p9? We should test this on older systems as well, it
is a problem as old as the world!
> +void *memset(void *b, int c, unsigned long len)
> +{
> + unsigned long i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
> + ((unsigned char *)b)[i] = c;
> +
> + return b;
> +}
> +
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "rlwinm" } } */
Please at least use {\mrlwinm\M}. There are many other insns that can
be used for this same purpose as well. We should at least test rldicl
here as well.
Segher
