https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78516
--- Comment #13 from Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #11)
> Created attachment 40372 [details]
> The proposed patch
Agreed your additions to my change looks good. However, I'm not so sure about
this last hunk:
- SET_SRC (curr_insn_set) = new_reg;
+ {
+ SET_SRC (curr_insn_set) = new_reg;
+ if (SUBREG_P (src))
+ SUBREG_REG (SET_SRC (curr_insn_set)) = new_reg;
+ else
+ SET_SRC (curr_insn_set) = new_reg;
+ }
Specifically, I don't think you meant to leave the following code as part of
that:
+ SET_SRC (curr_insn_set) = new_reg;
since after we execute that, SET_SRC (curr_insn_set) won't be
a subreg anymore and the following:
+ SUBREG_REG (SET_SRC (curr_insn_set)) = new_reg;
won't end well. I think we want your patch minus that one line.
