Hello Bernhard:
On 23/10/23 7:40 pm, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:16:18 +0530
> Ajit Agarwal <aagar...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello All:
>>
>> Addressed below review comments in the version 11 of the patch.
>> Please review and please let me know if its ok for trunk.
>
> s/satisified/satisfied/
>
I will fix this.
>>> As said, I don't see why the below was not cleaned up before the V1
>>> submission.
>>> Iff it breaks when manually CSEing, I'm curious why?
>
> The function below looks identical in v12 of the patch.
> Why didn't you use common subexpressions?
> ba
Using CSE here breaks aarch64 regressions hence I have reverted it back
not to use CSE,
>>>
>>>>> +/* Return TRUE if reg source operand of zero_extend is argument registers
>>>>> + and not return registers and source and destination operand are same
>>>>> + and mode of source and destination operand are not same. */
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static bool
>>>>> +abi_extension_candidate_p (rtx_insn *insn)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + rtx set = single_set (insn);
>>>>> + machine_mode dst_mode = GET_MODE (SET_DEST (set));
>>>>> + rtx orig_src = XEXP (SET_SRC (set), 0);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!FUNCTION_ARG_REGNO_P (REGNO (orig_src))
>>>>> + || abi_extension_candidate_return_reg_p (/*insn,*/ REGNO
>>>>> (orig_src)))
>>>>> + return false;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* Mode of destination and source should be different. */
>>>>> + if (dst_mode == GET_MODE (orig_src))
>>>>> + return false;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + machine_mode mode = GET_MODE (XEXP (SET_SRC (set), 0));
>>>>> + bool promote_p = abi_target_promote_function_mode (mode);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* REGNO of source and destination should be same if not
>>>>> + promoted. */
>>>>> + if (!promote_p && REGNO (SET_DEST (set)) != REGNO (orig_src))
>>>>> + return false;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + return true;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>
>
>>>
>>> As said, please also rephrase the above (and everything else if it
>>> obviously looks akin the above).
>
> thanks
