On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 09:36:04PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Looks good to me, except ... > > + mem = change_address (mem, VOIDmode, scratch_or_premodify); > > Maybe replace_equiv_address instead, to avoid losing the memory > attribute information (alignment, alias set, ...)?
Yes, in fact replace_equiv_address_nv is even better. (As witnessed by the use of that function in reload.c, reload1.c. We know validating the address is just a waste of time, as is calling update_temp_slot_address.) I'll bootstrap and regtest again with that change. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM
