This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: ARM patch: Split compare_scc (PR42835)


On 07/03/2010 03:57 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:

> Last time I looked, the rules on canonicalization just said that "the
> more complex operation went first".  In practice that meant that a
> constant was always last, and a register was always placed after an
> operation that took sub-operands.

>From the manual:

   * For associative operators, a sequence of operators will always
     chain to the left; for instance, only the left operand of an
     integer `plus' can itself be a `plus'.

> Will review patch itself momentarily.

While I was working on something else I noticed that we don't actually
need the new CC_NOTB mode, as we can use plain CC whereever it is
produced.  The ARM condition codes did manage to confuse me in the end.
 Not much harm done, but do you want to preapprove a change CC_NOTB->CC
everywhere?  I could merge it with this patch.


Bernd


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]