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]

Re: I387 commutative fpop patterns


On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 01:43:17AM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> There is some code to handle the "two address" instructions (ie those that
> contains "0" in constraint.

And regmove doesn't notice the existing "0,fm"/"fm,0" pairs?
Believable -- that's kinda ugly to check for.

> There is problem with reg-stack. It does substitue registers and prevents
> patterns from matching.

I'm very puzzled by this statement.  The existing patterns _do_
use a matching constraint, the only thing they lack is the %.
So what changed that we couldn't match?

> +     case PLUS:
> +     case MULT:
> +       return GET_MODE_CLASS (GET_MODE (op)) == MODE_FLOAT;

No need to check explicitly for PLUS/MULT; check GET_RTX_CLASS == 'c'.


r~


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