On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 17:05 +0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> ------- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-22 17:05
> -------
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > Yet another test case from Anton we don't catch. Will they never end?!?! ;)
> I bet a beer or a shot of vodka, that this is caused by MEM_REF not expanding
> with a REG_POINTER.
And I lost because we have:
;; sum = sum + MEM[base: base, index: (int *) i * 4B]
(insn 29 27 30 (set (reg:SI 128)
(ashift:SI (reg/v:SI 123 [ i ])
(const_int 2 [0x2]))) -1 (nil)
(nil))
(insn 30 29 31 (set (reg:SI 129)
(mem:SI (plus:SI (reg:SI 128)
(reg/v/f:SI 125 [ base ])) [0 S4 A32])) -1 (nil)
(nil))
(insn 31 30 0 (set (reg/v:SI 122 [ sum ])
(plus:SI (reg/v:SI 122 [ sum ])
(reg:SI 129))) -1 (nil)
(nil))
-- Pinski
