This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, i386]: Implement reversed patterns for *fp_jcc_7 and*fp_jcc_8
- From: Uros Bizjak <uros at kss-loka dot si>
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:49:41 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, i386]: Implement reversed patterns for *fp_jcc_7 and*fp_jcc_8
- References: <41CBD192.2000508@kss-loka.si> <20041225044516.GA22769@redhat.com>
Richard Henderson wrote:
On Fri, Dec 24, 2004 at 09:21:38AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
+ && ix86_fp_jump_nontrivial_p (swap_condition (GET_CODE (operands[0])))"
swap_condition is incorrect. This is reverse_condition.
I don't understand this change... The swapping of arms, which is
required for this pattern to match, is compensated by calling
swap_condition() on comparison operator.
When I look into other patterns (*fp_jcc_3 and its reverse pattern
*fp_jcc_4), both of them have "&& ix86_fp_jump_nontrivial_p (GET_CODE
(operands[0]))", that is why the same "swap condition" in
ix86_fp_jump_nontrivial_p (as in *fp_jcc_8) was choosen. I would be
realy grateful for a short explanation here...
Uros.