This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Fix to mn10300 cmpsi pattern
- To: Matt Hiller <hiller at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: Fix to mn10300 cmpsi pattern
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Date: 28 Mar 2001 17:42:17 -0300
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0103271750040.6836-100000@breve.cygnus.com>
On Mar 27, 2001, Matt Hiller <hiller@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 27 Mar 2001, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> > but %0 could be an address or extended register. How about btst
>> > 0,d0 instead?
>>
>> Should be fine, with some comments explaining why it sets the flags
>> correctly and why the actual register doesn't matter. Using a data
>> register will in fact generate smaller code than using the
>> extended-register version of btst introduced in AM33.
> Okay. How's this?
Ok.
But I suppose we could remove the `!'s from the alternative now, since
it's no longer discouraged. Consider it pre-approved, if you feel
like doing it.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me