Fix to i386 binarry operation predicates

[Jan Hubicka]

> 
> Hmmm, I get the idea that this patch causes the large differences in
> SPECfp2000 figures (between 13/2 7:27 UTC and 13/2 15:54 UTC) as
> produced by Andreas Jaeger's setup.
> 
> Unfortunately, it has positive and negative effects, e.g., applu that
> drops 20+ points.

It can be the reg-stack problem. It is generally the property of FP tests
that the values fluctulate around.
> 
> Could that be caused by the fact that operand constraints are now more
> general and the conditional more restrictive, i.e., that sometimes this
> instruction is chosen when it shouldn't be ?

I don't think so, it would result in unrecognizable insn. We always test
conditional after matching.``
> 
> Can this be tightened up, e.g., by Jan's own suggestion:
> 
> "Perhaps I can go with only single nonimmediate operand in the operand 1
>  and rewrite predicates as "=f" "fm" "0", but I feel somewhat
>  unconfortable about such reversed order isntructions."

I am just running benchmark comparison of this at my home machine. I will
know results afternoon.
> 
> ?
> 
> Thanks for any insight offered.
> 
> -- 
> Toon Moene - mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290
> Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
> Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
> Join GNU Fortran 95: http://g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)