On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Richard Sandiford <richard.sandif...@linaro.org> wrote: > 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.
Fine with me. Thanks, Richard. > Richard
