On 12/08/2012 05:30 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Vladimir Makarov <vmaka...@redhat.com> writes:
Index: lra-constraints.c
===================================================================
--- lra-constraints.c (revision 194307)
+++ lra-constraints.c (working copy)
@@ -3329,8 +3329,9 @@ lra_constraints (bool first_p)
reg = regno_reg_rtx[i];
if ((hard_regno = lra_get_regno_hard_regno (i)) >= 0)
{
- int j, nregs = hard_regno_nregs[hard_regno][PSEUDO_REGNO_MODE (i)];
+ int j, nregs;
+ nregs = hard_regno_nregs[hard_regno][lra_reg_info[i].biggest_mode];
for (j = 0; j < nregs; j++)
df_set_regs_ever_live (hard_regno + j, true);
It looks like this loop now iterates over a different mode from the
pseudo register's, but starts at the hard register allocated to the
pseudo. That doesn't work on big-endian targets, where the "extra"
registers come before hard_regno. I think you need to use
simplify_subreg_regno (...subreg_lowpart_offset (...)).
I realise we only support little-endian for 4.8, but still.
Yes, Richard, I am aware about it. There are a few places in LRA where
similar code should be fixed for big-endian targets. I'd like to
address this problem on lra-branch when I am less busy.
Maybe it'd be worth having a helper function that provides the range.
