On 05/21/2015 11:44 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:34:14AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: >> Actually, I believe that the way CA is modeled at the moment is dangerous. >> It's not a 64-bit value, but a 1-bit value. > > It's a fixed register and it is only ever set to 0 or 1. There are > more targets that do such things, and it is safe.
Old Cygnus proverb: Lie to the compiler and it will always bite you in the end. > I've tried with BImode before, with two effects: 1) the patterns become > much more unmanageable; and 2) the optimisers do a lousy job on it. > BImode isn't so well supported. Really? Zero-extending from BImode should be no different than from SImode, and we handle that all the time. > Let's wait for Alan's patch that makes combine not reorder things > unnecessarily, that should take care of it all as far as I see. I remain skeptical, but I'm also willing to let someone else worry about it. ;-) r~
