Richard Guenther <richard.guent...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> wrote: >>> I'd say open a missed optimization bug with the testcase and go ahead >>> with both patches. Let's see if Eric has some comments first though. >> >> None, but the m32c maintainer may have some. >> >> DJ, do you happen to know the rationale for the use of the MEM_SCALAR_P and >> MEM_IN_STRUCT_P flags in m32c_immd_dbl_mov? What condition do these tests >> try >> to model exactly? > > Ping? I'm now running into wrong-code issues because of store_field setting > MEM_IN_STRUCT_P of !MEM_SCALAR_P ... that's not a conservative > guesstimate, and initial attribute finding already has discovered everything > possible. Thus, I'm testing but was remembering your patch removing > all traces of MEM_IN_STRUCT_P/MEM_SCALAR_P which would be > of course even better.
Yeah, sorry, I was waiting (probably too long) to see if DJ had any comments. > Given DJs lack of response I'd say he doesn't know or does not have any > objection. OK. I'm certainly happy to apply the earlier patches tonight if that's still all right with you. Richard
