http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46880
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-12-21 14:45:08 UTC --- Created attachment 22836 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22836 gcc46-pr46880.patch Untested fix. In both of these insns, for the shufpd $2 alternative %2 operand uses constraint 0 while %1 operand uses constraint x. So, using shuftpd $2, %2, %0 looks wrong, because that will never look at the other operand, shuftpd $2, %0, %0 is IMHO a nop.
