Georg,
Currently we implemented the expander ,where passing arguments and
handling return type had been taken care in the expander along the
emitting call insn.
Do you have any suggestion over here like other practical approach ?
Appreciate your reply here.
Thank you in advance
~Umesh
On W
Am 03/25/2014 01:28 PM, schrieb Jeff Law:
On 03/25/14 06:23, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
Dear All,
The GCC source reference 4.8.1 will synthesized some of the double
word operations(SI mode) like add /sub in the below case from the word
size (HI) patterns,
(code snippet)
expand_binop_directly functi
On 03/25/14 06:23, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
Dear All,
The GCC source reference 4.8.1 will synthesized some of the double
word operations(SI mode) like add /sub in the below case from the word
size (HI) patterns,
(code snippet)
expand_binop_directly function in the optabs.c.
/* These can be done a
Dear All,
The GCC source reference 4.8.1 will synthesized some of the double
word operations(SI mode) like add /sub in the below case from the word
size (HI) patterns,
(code snippet)
expand_binop_directly function in the optabs.c.
/* These can be done a word at a time by propagating carries. */
> While working with some splitters I noticed that the RTL optimisation
> passes do not optimise away a no-op wrapped in a cond_exec.
>
> So for example, if my splitter generates something like:
> (cond_exec (lt:SI (reg:CC CC_REGNUM) (const_int 0))
>(set (match_dup 1)
>
Hi everyone,
While working with some splitters I noticed that the RTL optimisation
passes do not optimise away a no-op wrapped in a cond_exec.
So for example, if my splitter generates something like:
(cond_exec (lt:SI (reg:CC CC_REGNUM) (const_int 0))
(set (match_dup 1)
