On Tue, 11 Jun 2013, Alan Modra wrote:
> Index: gcc/doc/tm.texi.in
> ===
> --- gcc/doc/tm.texi.in(revision 199781)
> +++ gcc/doc/tm.texi.in(working copy)
> @@ -6375,6 +6375,12 @@
> registers on machines with lots of r
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 06:31:55PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:00 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> >
> >> The following patch disables lower-subreg for double double TFmode,
> >> bootstrap and regression tests are OK, b
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:00 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
>
>> The following patch disables lower-subreg for double double TFmode,
>> bootstrap and regression tests are OK, but I'm a little unsure whether
>> this is the right thing to do.
>>
>>
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> The following patch disables lower-subreg for double double TFmode,
> bootstrap and regression tests are OK, but I'm a little unsure whether
> this is the right thing to do.
>
> * rs6000.c (TARGET_INIT_LOWER_SUBREG): Define.
> (
Should lower-subreg be disabled for IBM long double TFmode?
On powerpc64-linux, this testcase
long double ld_abs (long double x)
{
return __builtin_fabsl (x);
}
compiled with -m64 -O2 -S generates the horrible code shown on the
left. The code on the right is ideal, as generated by gcc-4.2. We
