Re: Remove word_mode hack for split bitfields

2016-06-06 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 05/26/2016 04:36 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: This patch is effectively reverting a change from 1994. The reason I think it's a hack is that store_bit_field_1 is creating a subreg reference to one word of a field even though it has already proven that the field spills into the following word.

Re: Remove word_mode hack for split bitfields

2016-06-01 Thread Richard Sandiford
Bernd Schmidt writes: > On 05/26/2016 04:36 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> This patch is effectively reverting a change from 1994. The reason >> I think it's a hack is that store_bit_field_1 is creating a subreg >> reference to one word of a field even though it has already proven that >> the fi

Re: Remove word_mode hack for split bitfields

2016-05-31 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 05/26/2016 04:36 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: This patch is effectively reverting a change from 1994. The reason I think it's a hack is that store_bit_field_1 is creating a subreg reference to one word of a field even though it has already proven that the field spills into the following word.

Remove word_mode hack for split bitfields

2016-05-26 Thread Richard Sandiford
This patch is effectively reverting a change from 1994. The reason I think it's a hack is that store_bit_field_1 is creating a subreg reference to one word of a field even though it has already proven that the field spills into the following word. We then rely on the special SUBREG handling in st