> [gcc] > 2013-10-11 Michael Meissner <meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > PR target/58673 > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_legitimate_address_p): Only > restrict TImode addresses to single indirect registers if both > -mquad-memory and -mvsx-timode are used. > (rs6000_output_move_128bit): Use quad_load_store_p to determine if > we should emit load/store quad. Remove using %y for quad memory > addresses. > > * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (mov<mode>_ppc64, TI/PTImode): Add > constraints to allow load/store quad on machines where TImode is > not allowed in VSX registers. > > [gcc/testsuite] > 2013-10-11 Michael Meissner <meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > PR target/58673 > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr58673-1.c: New file to test whether > -mquad-word + -mno-vsx-timode causes errors. > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr58673-2.c: Likewise.
This is okay, except: - [(set (match_operand:TI2 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=Y,r,r,r") - (match_operand:TI2 1 "input_operand" "r,Y,r,F"))] + [(set (match_operand:TI2 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=wQ,Y,r,r,r,r") + (match_operand:TI2 1 "input_operand" "r,r,wQ,Y,r,F"))] As Ken Zadeck and Richard Sandiford noticed this morning, the "F" constraint seems to be a cut-and-paste error because the "F" constraint corresponds to an immediate scalar or vector float value, which never will match TImode. Should this constraint be "n"? The GCC testsuite apparently is missing a test to ensure that a large TImode immediate value can be loaded on targets that support int128_t. Thanks, David
