Hi, here is a status of LRA on ARM, after Vladimir's patch and a rebase of my branch:
AArch64: No more issues in the testsuite, the libstdc++ ones weren't LRA specific, they happened at the pass manager level and due to PCH inclusion, but were fixed with the trunk update. Thus, I'll post a patch to enable LRA on AArch64, but it is still needed to have the RTL analyser patch accepted. AArch32: No more issues in libstdc++ as well (same as reasons as AArch64), and only 3 failures in the testsuite: - The first one is invalid as the test sans the assembler for "ldaex\tr\[0-9\]+..." and it fails because with LRA the chosen register is r12 and thus the instruction is "ldaex ip,..." - The two others are the same bug where LRA keeps some REG_NOTES (DEAD and UNUSED) on a comparison pattern where reload removes then, and the results is that the comparison is removed. I'm currently working on this issue. - Thumb still doesn't bootstrap. Thanks, Yvan On 11 September 2013 20:57, Yvan Roux <yvan.r...@linaro.org> wrote: >> Yeah, good point. TBH I prefer it with separate ifs though, because the >> three cases are dealing with three different types of rtl (unary, binary >> and ternary). But I don't mind much either way. > > Ok, it's fine for me too. > >> The new patch looks good to me, thanks. Just one minor style nit: >> "return false" rather than "return 0" for the bool. Maybe also change: >> >> /* Bitfield operations [SIGN|ZERO]_EXTRACT from the least significant >> bit can be used too. */ >> >> to something like: >> >> /* A [SIGN|ZERO]_EXTRACT from the least significant bit effectively >> acts as a combined truncation and extension. */ > > Yeah, its clearer. I'll post the new patch in the other thread. > >> I really will try to make that my last comment and leave things open >> for an official review :-) > > :-) once again many thanks for your help Richard. > > Cheers, > Yvan
