On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:18 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich....@gmail.com> wrote: >> Did you check the above with x32, where Pmode != word_mode on x86_64? >> The inner UNSPEC will be generated in SImode, but the matching pattern >> >> +(define_insn "*<mode>_mk" >> + [(set (match_operand:BND 0 "register_operand" "=B") >> + (unspec:BND >> + [(match_operator:<bnd_ptr> 3 "bnd_mem_operator" >> + [(unspec:<bnd_ptr> >> + [(match_operand:<bnd_ptr> 1 "register_operand" "r") >> + (match_operand:<bnd_ptr> 2 "address_mpx_no_base_operand" "Tb")] >> + UNSPEC_BNDMK_ADDR)])] >> + UNSPEC_BNDMK))] >> + "TARGET_MPX" >> >> will have inner UNSPEC in DImode, due to: >> >> +;; Bound modes. >> +(define_mode_iterator BND [(BND32 "!TARGET_64BIT") (BND64 "TARGET_64BIT")]) >> + >> +;; Pointer mode corresponding to bound mode. >> +(define_mode_attr bnd_ptr [(BND32 "SI") (BND64 "DI")]) > > Currently we do not support MPX instrumentation for x32 and therefore > I did not check these expands work correctly for x32. I believe the > only possible problem here is BND iterator definition which does not > care about x32. Following declaration should make everything work > fine: >
Since MPX spec doesn't support x32, MPX should be disallowed with x32. -- H.J.
