On 04/03/16 15:07, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 02:48:21PM +0000, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Although there are case where we hit the same problem:
unsigned long
f3 (unsigned long bit_addr)
{
unsigned long bitnumb = bit_addr & 63;
return (1L << bitnumb);
}
combine will try to match:
(set (reg:DI 78)
(ashift:DI (reg:DI 80)
(subreg:SI (and:DI (reg:DI 0 x0 [ bit_addr ])
(const_int 63 [0x3f])) 0)))
does that mean that the shift amount should be DImode?
Heh. Maybe? Try it out, see which works best.
My point was that you do not have QI anywhere else. Registers are
always SI or DI (I think? Not totally familiar with the aarch64 code).
Yeah, registers can be accessed either in SImode (w-form) or DImode (x-form)
and if an instruction writes the SImode form the top 32 bits are implicitly
zeroed out.
Seems like a more flexible approach would be for the midend to be able to
handle these things...
Of course. OTOH, there is no reason to make it harder than necessary
for the compiler to do a reasonable job ;-)
I'll do some more investigations. Last time I looked at changing the mode I
recall
having various zero_extends being introduced that hurt matching...
Kyrill
Segher
