On 26/06/14 20:12, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 07:41:22PM +1000, Kugan wrote:
>> 2014-06-26 Kugan Vivekanandarajah <kug...@linaro.org>
>>
>> * calls.c (precompute_arguments): Use new SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET
>> instead of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET
>
> Missing full stop.
>
>> --- a/gcc/cfgexpand.c
>> +++ b/gcc/cfgexpand.c
>> @@ -3297,7 +3297,7 @@ expand_gimple_stmt_1 (gimple stmt)
>> ;
>> else if (promoted)
>> {
>> - int unsignedp = SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target);
>> + int unsignedp = SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED;
>
> From what I understand, here you want the -1/0/1 value and not 2,
> so that is
> int unsignedp = SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target);
> if (unsignedp == SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED) unsignedp = SRP_UNSIGNED;
> I think. Do you agree?
I agree.
> BTW, the final patch will probably need to be tested on one of the weirdo
> ptr_extend targets (ia64-hpux or x86_64-linux -mx32).
I am now looking at testing on such targets. I just want to double check
that x86_64-linux -mx32 is OK for this. When I looked at the src, it
looked to me #define POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED -1 is needed for this to
happen. x86_64-linux -mx32 doesnt seem to fall into thss.
In addition, I will also test AArch64 ILP32 (#define
POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED 1), ARM and x86_64 before posting the patch.
>> --- a/gcc/expr.c
>> +++ b/gcc/expr.c
>> @@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ convert_move (rtx to, rtx from, int unsignedp)
>> if (GET_CODE (from) == SUBREG && SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (from)
>> && (GET_MODE_PRECISION (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (from)))
>> >= GET_MODE_PRECISION (to_mode))
>> - && SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (from) == unsignedp)
>> + && SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN (from, unsignedp))
>
> I think unsignedp (misnamed) may be -1/0/1 here, so either
> SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN needs to handle those 3, or you need to use
> something else. If it handles all 3 values, then it would be say
> ((SIGN) == SRP_POINTER ? SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (RTX) == SRP_POINTER
> : (SIGN) == SRP_SIGNED ? SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P (RTX)
> : SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (RTX))
> or so.
I have changed it. I have defined a macro SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGN for this.
>
>> from = gen_lowpart (to_mode, from), from_mode = to_mode;
>>
>> gcc_assert (GET_CODE (to) != SUBREG || !SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (to));
>> @@ -703,7 +703,7 @@ convert_modes (enum machine_mode mode, enum machine_mode
>> oldmode, rtx x, int uns
>>
>> if (GET_CODE (x) == SUBREG && SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (x)
>> && GET_MODE_SIZE (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (x))) >= GET_MODE_SIZE (mode)
>> - && SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (x) == unsignedp)
>> + && SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN (x, unsignedp))
>> x = gen_lowpart (mode, SUBREG_REG (x));
>
> Similarly.
I have changed it too.
>
>> @@ -5203,24 +5203,25 @@ store_expr (tree exp, rtx target, int call_param_p,
>> bool nontemporal)
>> == TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (exp)))
>> {
>> if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (exp))
>> - != SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target))
>> + != SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED)
>
> Here TYPE_UNSIGNED is 0 or 1, so if you define SUBREG_PROMOTED_CHECK_SIGN
> the way suggested above, this would be SUBREG_PROMOTED_CHECK_SIGN then,
> or if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (exp))
> ? SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target)
> : SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P (target))
>
>> {
>> /* Some types, e.g. Fortran's logical*4, won't have a signed
>> version, so use the mode instead. */
>> tree ntype
>> = (signed_or_unsigned_type_for
>> - (SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target), TREE_TYPE (exp)));
>> + (SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED,
>
> I'd just use TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (exp)) here instead,
> no reason to repeat what the guarding condition did.
Did you mean !TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (exp))?. isn’t it better to use
the macro SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGN (defined earlier as you suggested) here?
It might be more readable. I am happy to do what you like.
>
>> + TREE_TYPE (exp)));
>> if (ntype == NULL)
>> ntype = lang_hooks.types.type_for_mode
>> (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (exp)),
>> - SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target));
>> + SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED);
>>
>> exp = fold_convert_loc (loc, ntype, exp);
>> }
>>
>> exp = fold_convert_loc (loc, lang_hooks.types.type_for_mode
>> (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (target)),
>> - SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target)),
>> + SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED),
>> exp);
>
> I believe fold_convert only considers zero and non-zero, so no idea
> what we want here for SRP_POINTER. Doing what we used to do would
> be SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) != SRP_SIGNED.
>>
>> inner_target = SUBREG_REG (target);
>> @@ -5234,14 +5235,14 @@ store_expr (tree exp, rtx target, int call_param_p,
>> bool nontemporal)
>> if (CONSTANT_P (temp) && GET_MODE (temp) == VOIDmode)
>> {
>> temp = convert_modes (GET_MODE (target), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (exp)),
>> - temp, SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target));
>> + temp, SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) &
>> SRP_UNSIGNED);
>> temp = convert_modes (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (target)),
>> GET_MODE (target), temp,
>> - SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target));
>> + SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED);
>> }
>>
>> convert_move (SUBREG_REG (target), temp,
>> - SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target));
>> + SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED);
>
> In all 3 cases here you want -1/0/1 and treat SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED as
> probably 1, so supposedly you want a macro for that and use it
> in the 3 cases here, in expand_gimple_stmt_1 etc.
I have changed this.
>> --- a/gcc/rtl.h
>> +++ b/gcc/rtl.h
>> @@ -1585,29 +1585,67 @@ get_full_set_src_cost (rtx x, struct full_rtx_costs
>> *c)
>> #define SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P(RTX) \
>> (RTL_FLAG_CHECK1 ("SUBREG_PROMOTED", (RTX), SUBREG)->in_struct)
>>
>> -#define SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET(RTX, VAL)
>> \
>> -do {
>> \
>> - rtx const _rtx = RTL_FLAG_CHECK1 ("SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET", \
>> - (RTX), SUBREG); \
>> - if ((VAL) < 0) \
>> - _rtx->volatil = 1;
>> \
>> - else { \
>> - _rtx->volatil = 0;
>> \
>> - _rtx->unchanging = (VAL);
>> \
>> - } \
>> -} while (0)
>> -
>> /* Valid for subregs which are SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P(). In that case
>> this gives the necessary extensions:
>> - 0 - signed
>> - 1 - normal unsigned
>> + 0 - signed (SPR_SIGNED)
>> + 1 - normal unsigned (SPR_UNSIGNED)
>> + 2 - value is both sign and unsign extended for mode
>> + (SPR_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED).
>> -1 - pointer unsigned, which most often can be handled like unsigned
>> extension, except for generating instructions where we need to
>> - emit special code (ptr_extend insns) on some architectures. */
>> + emit special code (ptr_extend insns) on some architectures
>> + (SPR_POINTER). */
>> +
>> +const unsigned int SRP_POINTER = -1;
>> +const unsigned int SRP_SIGNED = 0;
>> +const unsigned int SRP_UNSIGNED = 1;
>> +const unsigned int SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED = 2;
>> +
>> +/* Sets promoted mode for SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P(). */
>> +#define SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET(RTX, VAL)
>> \
>> +do {
>> \
>> + rtx const _rtx = RTL_FLAG_CHECK1 ("SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET", \
>> + (RTX), SUBREG); \
>> + switch ((VAL)) \
>
> Please avoid the extra ()s, switch (VAL) is enough.
>
>> +/* Checks if RTX of SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P() is promotd for given SIGN. */
>
> promoted, typo.
>
>> +#define SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN(RTX, SIGN) \
>> + ((SIGN) ? SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET ((RTX)) != SRP_SIGNED \
>> + : SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P ((RTX)))
>
> See above. And note the ((RTX)) should have been (RTX) anyway.
>
>> @@ -5587,7 +5587,8 @@ simplify_subreg (enum machine_mode outermode, rtx op,
>> {
>> newx = gen_rtx_SUBREG (outermode, SUBREG_REG (op), final_offset);
>> if (SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (op)
>> - && SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (op) >= 0
>> + && (SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (op)
>> + || (SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P (op)))
>
> SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (op) != SRP_POINTER ?
> Also note the extra ()s.
>
>> && GET_MODE_CLASS (outermode) == MODE_INT
>> && IN_RANGE (GET_MODE_SIZE (outermode),
>> GET_MODE_SIZE (innermode),
>> @@ -5595,8 +5596,7 @@ simplify_subreg (enum machine_mode outermode, rtx op,
>> && subreg_lowpart_p (newx))
>> {
>> SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (newx) = 1;
>> - SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET
>> - (newx, SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (op));
>> + SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET (newx, SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (op));
>> }
>> return newx;
>> }
>
I have changed the above as well. I will post the patch after testing
for all the necessary targets.
Thanks for the help.
Kugan
