On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 8:48 AM H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 10/25/18, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 8:07 AM H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> * read-rtl.c (apply_subst_iterator): Handle > >> define_insn_and_split. > >> --- > >> gcc/read-rtl.c | 6 ++++-- > >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/gcc/read-rtl.c b/gcc/read-rtl.c > >> index d698dd4af4d..5957c29671a 100644 > >> --- a/gcc/read-rtl.c > >> +++ b/gcc/read-rtl.c > >> @@ -275,9 +275,11 @@ apply_subst_iterator (rtx rt, unsigned int, int > >> value) > >> if (value == 1) > >> return; > >> gcc_assert (GET_CODE (rt) == DEFINE_INSN > >> + || GET_CODE (rt) == DEFINE_INSN_AND_SPLIT > >> || GET_CODE (rt) == DEFINE_EXPAND); > > > > Can we also handle DEFINE_SPLIT here? > > > > Yes, we could if there were a usage for it. I am reluctant to add something > I have no use nor test for.
Just split one define_insn_and_split to define_insn and corresponding define_split. define_insn_and_split is a contraction for for the define_insn and corresponding define_split, so it looks weird to only handle define_insn_and-split without handling define_split. Uros.
