On 03-07-14 10:20, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 2 July 2014 09:02, Tom de Vries <tom_devr...@mentor.com> wrote:
On 02-07-14 08:23, Marc Glisse wrote:
In the first example you gave, looking at the pattern (no match_dup,
setting the
full register), it seems that it may have wanted "=&" instead of "+&".
[ move discussion from gcc ml to gcc-patches ml ]
Marcus,
The +& constraint on operand 0 of vec_unpack_trunc_<mode> seems wrong, since
the template does not use the operand as input.
This patch fixes that.
OK for trunk if aarch64 build & regtest succeeds ?
Your patch looks fine, operand 0 isn't used for input. OK assuming no
regression. Did you find this by inspection or is this the cause of
some bug?
Marcus,
I found this by inspection: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-07/msg00007.html .
Thanks,
- Tom
