Message ID | CAEwic4Ym-HtjP03VFKWXYBcvQuoLe=KejMtL7iHnLEFBOR3LvA@mail.gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On 06/03/2014 11:21 AM, Kai Tietz wrote: > case AX_REG: > case DX_REG: > - return true; > + return (regno != DX_REG || !TARGET_64BIT || ix86_abi != MS_ABI); You might as well eliminate the first test, and split the case entries: case AX_REG: return true; case DX_REG: return !TARGET_64BIT || ix86_abi != MS_ABI; Otherwise it looks ok. r~
Index: i386.c =================================================================== --- i386.c (Revision 211198) +++ i386.c (Arbeitskopie) @@ -7775,7 +7775,7 @@ ix86_function_value_regno_p (const unsigned int r { case AX_REG: case DX_REG: - return true; + return (regno != DX_REG || !TARGET_64BIT || ix86_abi != MS_ABI); case DI_REG: case SI_REG: return TARGET_64BIT && ix86_abi != MS_ABI;