On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 5:42 PM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa <jjsuwa_sys3...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote: > > In recent gcc versions, REGNO_OK_FOR_BASE_P() is not called directly, but > rather via regno_ok_for_base_p() which is a wrapper in gcc/addresses.h. > The wrapper obtains a hard register number from pseudo via reg_renumber > array, so REGNO_OK_FOR_BASE_P() does not need to take this into > consideration. > > On the other hand, since there is only one use of REGNO_OK_FOR_BASE_P() > in the target-specific code, it would make more sense to simplify the > definition of REGNO_OK_FOR_BASE_P() and replace its call with that of > regno_ok_for_base_p(). > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * config/xtensa/xtensa.cc (#include): > Add "addresses.h". > * config/xtensa/xtensa.h (REGNO_OK_FOR_BASE_P): > Simplify to just a call to GP_REG_P(). > (BASE_REG_P): Replace REGNO_OK_FOR_BASE_P() with the equivalent > call to regno_ok_for_base_p(). > --- > gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa.cc | 1 + > gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa.h | 6 +++--- > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Regtested for target=xtensa-linux-uclibc, no new regressions. Committed to master. -- Thanks. -- Max
