Re: bin/47301: Miscompilation by bundled GCC

[<Paul_Koning%Dell.com@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR bin/47301; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: <Paul_Koning%Dell.com@localhost>
To: <gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Cc: <toolchain-manager%netbsd.org@localhost>, 
<gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost>,
        <netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>, <tg%gmplib.org@localhost>
Subject: Re: bin/47301: Miscompilation by bundled GCC
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:37:01 +0000

 On Dec 10, 2012, at 2:35 PM, David Laight wrote:
 
 > The following reply was made to PR bin/47301; it has been noted by GNATS.
 >=20
 > From: David Laight <david%l8s.co.uk@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > Cc:=20
 > Subject: Re: bin/47301: Miscompilation by bundled GCC
 > Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:48:40 +0000
 >=20
 > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 04:40:04PM +0000, Paul_Koning%Dell.com@localhost 
 > wrote:
 >>=20
 >> I wonder what that workaround would do to performance.
 >> This sort of reload case could pop up in lots of machine
 >> architectures -- any CISC-like machine might be affected.
 >> pdp11, 68k, i386, ...
 >=20
 > pdp11 is only 16bit.
 
 True but it still sees SI operands.  For that matter, I'm assuming it could=
  see the identical scenario if the arguments are HImode (which then matches=
  its register size).
 
 > i386 only allows one memory operand (except for special instructions
 >     with fixed registers.
 > m68k does allow memory-memory oparations (if I've read the book properly)=
 .