On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 04:39:56PM -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> PR debug/25023
> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_force_to_memory): Always use
> SImode push for HImode in -m32.
> (ix86_free_from_memory): Likewise.
>
> * gcc.dg/pr25023.c: New test.
Ok.
r~
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 09:25:45PM +, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> >While we could use pushhi2 insn
> >(would need to use pre_modify rather than pre_dec etc.), it wouldn't
> >buy us anything.
> >
> Presumably, it would prevent a partial register stall.
Alternatively we could
subl $4, %esp
movw %ax,
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 09:25:45PM +, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> >While we could use pushhi2 insn
> >(would need to use pre_modify rather than pre_dec etc.), it wouldn't
> >buy us anything.
> >
> Presumably, it would prevent a partial register stall.
Only if we use the real pushw instruction. Bu
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
While we could use pushhi2 insn
(would need to use pre_modify rather than pre_dec etc.), it wouldn't
buy us anything.
Presumably, it would prevent a partial register stall.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 08:49:56PM +, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> >I can't reproduce it (otherwise I wouldn't have committed it), it
> >bootstrapped/regtested just fine for me.
>
> >Can one of those who can reproduce it give me preprocessed mf-runtime.i
> >and exact gcc options that triggered it?
