This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] add split condition to *fix_trunchi_1
- From: Uros Bizjak <uros at kss-loka dot si>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:34:56 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] add split condition to *fix_trunchi_1
- References: <4191C131.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Zack Weinberg wrote:
This text is from gccint.info, "Insn Splitting" chapter:
+ "&& 1"
Aren't these functionally identical? If not, why not?
For the common case where the pattern of a define_split exactly
matches the pattern of a define_insn, use `define_insn_and_split'. It
looks like this:
INSN-PATTERN, CONDITION, OUTPUT-TEMPLATE, and INSN-ATTRIBUTES are
used as in `define_insn'. The NEW-INSN-PATTERN vector and the
PREPARATION-STATEMENTS are used as in a `define_split'. The
SPLIT-CONDITION is also used as in `define_split', with the additional
behavior that if the condition starts with `&&', the condition used for
the split will be the constructed as a logical "and" of the split
condition with the insn condition. For example, from i386.md: