Tilman Sauerbeck [2013-02-24 17:00]: > Richard Earnshaw [2013-02-20 11:00]: > > On 19/02/13 22:26, Tilman Sauerbeck wrote: > > >I don't get why relaxing the restrictions for the > > >andsi3_compare0_scratch pattern results in a mismatch for the > > >zeroextractsi_compare0_scratch one. > > > > > >Any ideas? > > > > Because of the way combine works. It first tries to find a pattern that > > doesn't have a clobber expression. It finds your new pattern and then uses > > that. But since that can't handle immediates, reload then comes along and > > forces the constant into a register. > > > > You need one pattern to deal with all the cases. > > You mean the pattern should include calls to arm_split_constant() to do > the loading itself, like e.g. the iorsi3 pattern does? > Why can't we let reload do the load? > > FWIW the patch in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-02/msg00920.html > works for my testcases, survives a bootstrap in qemu and passes the > test suite (I only built/tested the C and C++ frontends though).
Sorry to be a pain, but ... ping? I don't know how to proceed with this patch. Thanks. Regards, Tilman -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
