On 14/03/14 11:02, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> This would suggest that you can use the pattern also for performing a normal >> add in case the condition code is not needed afterwards but this isn't >> correct for s390 31 bit where an address calculation is actually something >> different. > > Then you should document that by stating that the pattern is guaranteed to be > invoked only for addresses (and may not clobber the condition code). Ok, will do.
>> addptr is better I think because it is a pattern which is >> supposed to be implemented with a load address instruction and the >> middle-end guarantees to use it only on addresses. (I hope LRA is actually >> behaving that way). > > Hoping isn't sufficient IMO here, you need to rename/rework emit_add3_insn > and > possibly stop the compiler if the value it is invoked on is not an address. Agreed. Any idea how to check for this? Bye, -Andreas-
