On Sep 1, 2016, at 9:32 AM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 09:15:32PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> This patch (suggested by Michael Meissner) instead prevents the problem
>> by disallowing reg+reg addressing for TImode, allowing D-form addressing
>> to be used for the sep
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 09:15:32PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> This patch (suggested by Michael Meissner) instead prevents the problem
> by disallowing reg+reg addressing for TImode, allowing D-form addressing
> to be used for the separate stores of the GPRs. This is not an ideal
> permanent solu
> This patch (suggested by Michael Meissner) instead prevents the problem
> by disallowing reg+reg addressing for TImode, allowing D-form addressing
> to be used for the separate stores of the GPRs. This is not an ideal
> permanent solution, because it disallows reg+reg addressing not only for
> T
Hi,
After much discussion we've concluded that the first patch isn't
salvageable. There are register assignments for which we can't fix up
the addressing legally after reload using such tricks (for example:
base=r31, offset=r0).
This patch (suggested by Michael Meissner) instead prevents the pro
