This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix powerpc bootstrap when using --enable-checking=rtl
- From: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
- To: Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 11:53:35 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix powerpc bootstrap when using --enable-checking=rtl
- References: <20061111055210.GB5018@vnet.ibm.com>
+/* Return the dest of a store insn. */
+
+static rtx
+get_store_dest (rtx pat)
+{
+ gcc_assert (is_store_insn1 (pat));
+
+ if (GET_CODE (pat) == SET)
+ return SET_DEST (pat);
+ else if (GET_CODE (pat) == PARALLEL)
+ {
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < XVECLEN (pat, 0); i++)
+ if (is_store_insn1 (XVECEXP (pat, 0, i)))
+ return XVECEXP (pat, 0, i);
Is it overly wasteful to call is_store_insn1() here? PAT already
is known to be a PARALLEL and I don't think one can have recursive
PARALLELs. I guess the abstraction isn't horrible.
+ }
+ /* We shouldn't get here, because we should have either a simple
+ store insn or a store with update which are covered above. */
+ gcc_assert (0);
Should't this be gcc_unreachable()?
+}
+
/* Returns whether the dependence between INSN and NEXT is considered
costly by the given target. */
Thanks, David