Richard Earnshaw <rearn...@arm.com> writes: > On 02/05/12 14:00, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> Jim MacArthur <jim.macart...@arm.com> writes: >>> New Changelog text: >>> >>> 2012-05-02 Jim MacArthur<jim.macart...@arm.com> >>> * recog.c (reg_fits_class_p): Check both regno and regno + offset are >>> hard registers. >> >> Thanks. I still think the final: >> >>> + && HARD_REGISTER_NUM_P (end_hard_regno (regno + offset, mode)) >> >> check belongs in in_hard_reg_set_p, since most callers don't (and IMO >> shouldn't need to) check this. The idea behind adding these functions >> was to commonise various bits of code that were doing the same checks >> in slightly different ways. Requiring each caller to check the end >> register would go against that to some extent. >> > > If you're going to do that (which is fine, BTW), I think > in_hard_reg_set_p should gcc_assert() that regno is a valid hard reg.
Sounds good. Richard
