[PATCH, reload] PRE_INC with invalid hard reg

[Bernd Schmidt]

On 02/12/2016 04:27 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> I don't understand this comment.  If we're pushing a reload of the
> inner reg, then the SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED code in push_reload will
> fire.  Why then should there be any need to do anything special in
> find_reloads_address_1 regarding secondary memory?

The idea was to find out whether we needed to special case things. But, 
after looking at this area for a while, I think your original patch 
makes the most sense and the things I was worried about are non-issues. 
Please commit.


Bernd