Identical? i386.md patterns for TARGET_64BIT and not

[Jan Hubicka]

> Why do we need both these insns?  As far as I can see the *only*
> difference is that one is TARGET_64BIT and one is !TARGET_64BIT.  This
> sort of duplication is widespread.
There is diference in the pointer size:
> 	  (compare:CC (mem:BLK (match_operand:SI 4 "register_operand" "0"))
64bit:
> 	  (compare:CC (mem:BLK (match_operand:DI 4 "register_operand" "0"))

As Richard mentioned, it may be nice to allow :P in the patterns, as this is
tricky to implement we are still sick on this scheme.

Honza