Re: peephole patterns are not matching

["Mohamed Shafi" <shafitvm at gmail dot com>]

On 4/12/07, Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> "Mohamed Shafi" <shafitvm@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > hello everyone,
> >
> > I have the following 2 patterns which are consecutive. (from shorten
> > rtl dump file)
> >
> > (insn 69 34 70 (set (reg:SQ 0 d0)
> >        (reg:SQ 18 f2)) 79 {movsq} (nil)
> >    (nil))
> >
> > (insn 70 69 35 (set (reg:SQ 16 f0 [orig:38 D.3693 ] [38])
> >        (reg:SQ 0 d0)) 79 {movsq} (nil)
> >    (nil))
> >
> >
> > For the above pattern i wrote a peephole like this
> >
> > (define_peephole
> >  [(set (match_operand:SF 0 "data_reg" "=d")
> >         (match_operand:SF 1 "float_reg"  "f"))
> >    (set (match_operand:SF 2 "float_reg" "=f")
> >         (match_operand:SF 3 "data_reg"  "d"))]
>
> The patterns match mode SF, but the insns have mode SQ.

sorry actually the patterns are like this

(insn 69 34 70 (set (reg:SF 0 d0)
       (reg:SF 18 f2)) 79 {movsf} (nil)
   (nil))

(insn 70 69 35 (set (reg:SF 16 f0 [orig:38 D.3693 ] [38])
       (reg:SF 0 d0)) 79 {movsf} (nil)
   (nil))

and the peephole is same as the above

> Andreas.
>
> --
> Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
> SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
> PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
> "And now for something completely different."