From: Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:40:08 +0200
>> While playing around with LRA on sparc I noticed that we had some >> poorly formed target memory constraints on sparc. >> >> In particular, they were not using define_memory_constraint, so we >> would not get a true return from EXTRA_MEMORY_CONSTRAINT for them. >> >> Also, these were matching 'reg' objects for special pseudo treatment. >> But the EXTRA_MEMORY_CONSTRAINT logic in reload (and LRA) take care of >> that stuff for us. > > Indeed. But you need to remove the associated comment: > > ;; Extra constraints > ;; Our memory extra constraints have to emulate the behavior of 'm' and 'o', > ;; i.e. accept pseudo-registers during reload. > > While you're at it, you could also move the (define_memory_constraint "w") > out > of the "register contraints" part and put it into a "memory constraints" part > with the other memory constraints. Thanks for catching this. Also the comment at the top can now mention the now-available constraint letter as well. I'll fix this up.
