Le mardi 24 janvier 2012 01:11:08, Daniel Glöckner a écrit : > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:30:54AM +0100, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > > Shouldn't the same fix (Cf attached file) be applied for x86-64? > > Yes you are right, x86-64 needs fixing as well. > > > As I'm not sure about the answer I didn't dare to commit the change. > > It needs to be modified a little, as load gets called with registers > not covered in reg_classes. I hope I understand what you meant well. Does this new patch fix the problem?
Best regards. > > Daniel Thomas Preud'homme
diff --git a/x86_64-gen.c b/x86_64-gen.c
index 4d2521d..264f9c5 100644
--- a/x86_64-gen.c
+++ b/x86_64-gen.c
@@ -367,8 +367,10 @@ void load(int r, SValue *sv)
v1.type.t = VT_PTR;
v1.r = VT_LOCAL | VT_LVAL;
v1.c.ul = fc;
- load(r, &v1);
fr = r;
+ if ((fr >= NB_REGS) || (!(reg_classes[fr] & RC_INT)))
+ fr = get_reg(RC_INT);
+ load(fr, &v1);
}
ll = 0;
if ((ft & VT_BTYPE) == VT_FLOAT) {
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
