On 06/01/2015 12:51 PM, Lev Yudalevich wrote:
While working on a custom backend for quite a standard RISC-like
architecture, I defined 'high'/'lo_sum' patterns as follows:
(define_insn "mov_high"
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
(high:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "immediate_operand" "i")))]
""
"mvup #high(%1), %0"
[(set_attr "insn" "alu")
(set_attr "length" "4")]
)
(define_insn "add_low"
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
(lo_sum:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand" "0")
(match_operand:SI 2 "symbolic_operand" "")))]
(match_operand:SI 2 "immediate_operand" "i")))]
""
"add3 %0, #low(%2), %0"
[(set_attr "insn" "alu")
(set_attr "length" "4")]
)
Despite having the patters above (along with usual 'plus' patterns)
I'm getting the following rtx emitted at the expansion stage:
(insn 53 52 63 2 (set (reg:SI 62)
(const:SI (plus:SI (symbol_ref:SI [flags 0x6])
(const_int
64 [0x40])))) -1
(nil))
which can not be recognized unless I define a pattern like this:
You should debug precisely where that came from. You're missing
something in your backend to tell GCC that such constants are not valid.
You should probably look at how expansion occurs for your tests on other
ports that make heavy use of high/lo_sum. sparc & hppa come immediately
to mind, but I'm sure there's others.
jeff
