On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 04:58:36PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 04:45:35PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > Combine gets as far as this:
> >
> > Trying 5 -> 9:
> > Failed to match this instruction:
> > (parallel [
> > (set (mem/v/j:QI (const_int 240 [0xf0]) [0 MEM
> Did you try just a define_split instead? Ugly, but it should work I think.
It doesn't seem to be able to match a define_split :-(
On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 04:45:35PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Combine gets as far as this:
>
> Trying 5 -> 9:
> Failed to match this instruction:
> (parallel [
> (set (mem/v/j:QI (const_int 240 [0xf0]) [0 MEM[(volatile union
> un_per0 *)240B].BIT.no4+0 S1 A16])
> (ior:QI (mem/
Given a test case like this:
typedef struct {
unsigned char no0 :1;
unsigned char no1 :1;
unsigned char no2 :1;
unsigned char no3 :1;
unsigned char no4 :1;
unsigned char no5 :1;
unsigned char no6 :1;
unsigned char no7 :1;
} __BITS8;
#define
On 07/01/2015 10:14 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
In this bit of code in explow.c:
/* By passing constant addresses through registers
we get a chance to cse them. */
if (! cse_not_expected && CONSTANT_P (x) && CONSTANT_ADDRESS_P (x))
x = force_reg (address_mode, x);
On the rl78 it res
In this bit of code in explow.c:
/* By passing constant addresses through registers
we get a chance to cse them. */
if (! cse_not_expected && CONSTANT_P (x) && CONSTANT_ADDRESS_P (x))
x = force_reg (address_mode, x);
On the rl78 it results in code that's a bit too complex for later
