gcc for m68332 isn't using bset and bclr
Philippe De Muyter
Fri Mar 3 04:18:00 GMT 2000
Richard Kenner wrote :
> - I'd prefer patterns to have a name : that makes output of `-dp' more
> readable. Without a name for the pattern, `-dp' will use `andqi3-2' or
> something like that. E.g. we could use here `iorqi_bit' and `andqi_bit'.
> If the pattern is not used by the expander, like here, it should have a name
> starting with '*'. If the condition for the pattern tests anything other
> than a global flag (here it does), it *must* have a name beginning with a '*'.
Should that not be explained in the doc ?
`Machine Desc/Patterns/Everything about Instruction Patterns' says only :
| 1. An optional name. The presence of a name indicate that this
| instruction pattern can perform a certain standard job for the
| RTL-generation pass of the compiler. This pass knows certain
| names and will use the instruction patterns with those names, if
| the names are defined in the machine description.
| The absence of a name is indicated by writing an empty string
| where the name should go. Nameless instruction patterns are never
| used for generating RTL code, but they may permit several simpler
| insns to be combined later on.
| Names that are not thus known and used in RTL-generation have no
| effect; they are equivalent to no name at all.
More information about the Gcc-patches