Andrea Corallo <andrea.cora...@arm.com> writes: > Hi all, > > having a look for force_reg returned rtx later on modified I've found > this other case in `aarch64_general_expand_builtin` while expanding > pointer authentication builtins. > > Regtested and bootsraped on aarch64-linux-gnu. > > Okay for trunk? > > Andrea > > From 8869ee04e3788fdec86aa7e5a13e2eb477091d0e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Andrea Corallo <andrea.cora...@arm.com> > Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 13:52:45 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] aarch64: Do not alter force_reg returned rtx expanding pauth > builtins > > 2020-09-21 Andrea Corallo <andrea.cora...@arm.com> > > * config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c > (aarch64_general_expand_builtin): Do not alter value on a > force_reg returned rtx. > --- > gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c > b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c > index b787719cf5e..a77718ccfac 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c > +++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c > @@ -2079,10 +2079,10 @@ aarch64_general_expand_builtin (unsigned int fcode, > tree exp, rtx target, > arg0 = CALL_EXPR_ARG (exp, 0); > op0 = force_reg (Pmode, expand_normal (arg0)); > > - if (!target) > + if (!(target > + && REG_P (target) > + && GET_MODE (target) == Pmode)) > target = gen_reg_rtx (Pmode); > - else > - target = force_reg (Pmode, target); > > emit_move_insn (target, op0);
Do we actually use the result of this move? It looked like we always use op0 rather than target (good) and overwrite target with a later move. If so, I think we should delete the move and convert the later code to use expand_insn. Thanks, Richard
