On 04/04/2011 06:04 PM, Henderson, Stuart wrote:
> Yep, I'm seeing this behaviour (getting the error using your patch).
> But I'm confused as to why the define_expand is being considered when
> the predicate doesn't match.
It's just a bug in expand. Your original patch (plus using
const_int_operan
Schmidt [mailto:ber...@codesourcery.com]
Sent: 31 March 2011 17:02
To: Richard Henderson
Cc: Henderson, Stuart; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] Bfin: Ensure rotrsi and rotlsi don't accept non-const
INTVALS
On 03/31/2011 05:42 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> (rotate:SI (match
On 03/31/2011 09:01 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> I have a dim memory of the problem being that something didn't check the
> predicate. Sure enough, with the patch below applied to a 4.3 tree, I get
>
> /local/src/egcs/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20020226-1.c:43:
> internal com
On 03/31/2011 05:42 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> (rotate:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand" "")
>> - (match_operand:SI 2 "immediate_operand" "")))]
>> + (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand" "")))]
>>""
>> {
>> - if (INTVAL (operands[2]) != 16)
>>
> (rotate:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand" "")
> -(match_operand:SI 2 "immediate_operand" "")))]
> +(match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand" "")))]
>""
> {
> - if (INTVAL (operands[2]) != 16)
> + if (GET_CODE (operands[2]) != CONST_INT || INTVAL
]
Sent: 30 March 2011 18:26
To: Henderson, Stuart
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] Bfin: Ensure rotrsi and rotlsi don't accept non-const
INTVALS
On 03/29/2011 08:49 AM, Henderson, Stuart wrote:
>(match_operand:SI 2 "immediate_operand" "&
On 03/29/2011 08:49 AM, Henderson, Stuart wrote:
>(match_operand:SI 2 "immediate_operand" "")))]
>""
> {
> - if (INTVAL (operands[2]) != 16)
> + if (GET_CODE (operands[2]) != CONST_INT || INTVAL (operands[2]) != 16)
> FAIL;
Perhaps use const_int_operand instead of i
