Hi Marcus,
Thanks for reviewing the patch.
>> Given the comment about SELECT_CC_MODE and the implementation of
>> aarch64_select_cc_mode this definition of REVERSIBLE_CC_MODE looks
>> broken to me.
Please find attached the modified patch that does not allow floating
point inequality comparisons in REVERSIBLE_CC_MODE.
Please review the patch and let me know if its OK?
Build and tested on aarch64-thunder-elf (using Cavium's internal
simulator). No new regressions.
Thanks,
Naveen.H.S
2013-01-09 Naveen H.S <[email protected]>
* config/aarch64/aarch64.h (REVERSIBLE_CC_MODE): Define.
--- gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.h 2013-01-09 09:55:56.315992619 +0530
+++ gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.h 2013-01-09 09:55:29.175991698 +0530
@@ -709,6 +709,14 @@ do { \
#define SELECT_CC_MODE(OP, X, Y) aarch64_select_cc_mode (OP, X, Y)
+/* A C expression whose value is one if it is always safe to reverse a
+ comparison whose mode is MODE. If `SELECT_CC_MODE' can ever return
+ MODE for a floating-point inequality comparison, then
+ `REVERSIBLE_CC_MODE (MODE)' must be zero.
+ You need not define this macro if it would always returns zero or if the
+ floating-point format is anything other than `IEEE_FLOAT_FORMAT'. */
+#define REVERSIBLE_CC_MODE(MODE) ((MODE) != CCFPEmode)
+
#define REVERSE_CONDITION(CODE, MODE) \
(((MODE) == CCFPmode || (MODE) == CCFPEmode) \
? reverse_condition_maybe_unordered (CODE) \
