On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Richard Kenner
<ken...@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> wrote:
>> X86 backend doesn't accept the new expression as valid address while
>> (zero_extend:DI) works just fine. This patches keeps ZERO_EXTEND
>> when zero-extending address to Pmode. It reduces number of lea from
>> 24173 to 21428 in x32 libgfortran.so. Does it make any senses?
>
> I'd be inclined to have the x86 backend accept combine's canonicalized
> form rather than doing a patch such as this.
>
The address format generated by combine is very unusual in
2 aspecst:
1. The placement of subreg in
(plus:DI (subreg:DI (mult:SI (reg/v:SI 85 [ i ])
(const_int 4 [0x4])) 0)
(subreg:DI (reg:SI 106) 0))
isn't supported by x86 backend.
2. The biggest problem is optimizing mask 0xffffffff to
0xfffffffc by keeping track of non-zero bits in registers.
X86 backend doesn't have such information to know
ADDR & 0xfffffffc == ADDR & 0xffffffff.
--
H.J.
