From: Richard Earnshaw <[email protected]>
The define_expand patterns for movdfcc, movsfcc and movhfcc had overly
tight contstraints that could cause the compiler to reject these
patterns when re-ordering the operands could lead to a successful
match. Relax the initial predicate test and rely on the test after
arm_validize_comparison has run to determine whether this is something
we can support. This fixes some test failures which were introduced
in the fix for PR118460
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/118460
* config/arm/arm.md (movhfcc): Use expandable_comparison_operator.
(movsfcc, movdfcc): Likewise.
---
gcc/config/arm/arm.md | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.md b/gcc/config/arm/arm.md
index 422ae549b65..1517d5d6b50 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.md
+++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.md
@@ -8350,7 +8350,7 @@
(define_expand "movhfcc"
[(set (match_operand:HF 0 "s_register_operand")
- (if_then_else:HF (match_operand 1 "arm_cond_move_operator")
+ (if_then_else:HF (match_operand 1 "expandable_comparison_operator")
(match_operand:HF 2 "s_register_operand")
(match_operand:HF 3 "s_register_operand")))]
"TARGET_VFP_FP16INST"
@@ -8372,7 +8372,7 @@
(define_expand "movsfcc"
[(set (match_operand:SF 0 "s_register_operand")
- (if_then_else:SF (match_operand 1 "arm_cond_move_operator")
+ (if_then_else:SF (match_operand 1 "expandable_comparison_operator")
(match_operand:SF 2 "s_register_operand")
(match_operand:SF 3 "s_register_operand")))]
"TARGET_32BIT && TARGET_HARD_FLOAT"
@@ -8394,7 +8394,7 @@
(define_expand "movdfcc"
[(set (match_operand:DF 0 "s_register_operand")
- (if_then_else:DF (match_operand 1 "arm_cond_move_operator")
+ (if_then_else:DF (match_operand 1 "expandable_comparison_operator")
(match_operand:DF 2 "s_register_operand")
(match_operand:DF 3 "s_register_operand")))]
"TARGET_32BIT && TARGET_HARD_FLOAT && TARGET_VFP_DOUBLE"
