On 13-06-19 2:31 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Richard Sandiford <rdsandif...@googlemail.com> writes:
Vladimir Makarov <vmaka...@redhat.com> writes:
Index: lra.c
===================================================================
--- lra.c (revision 199753)
+++ lra.c (working copy)
@@ -306,11 +306,11 @@ lra_emit_add (rtx x, rtx y, rtx z)
|| (disp != NULL_RTX && ! CONSTANT_P (disp))
|| (scale != NULL_RTX && ! CONSTANT_P (scale)))
{
- /* Its is not an address generation. Probably we have no 3 op
+ /* It is not an address generation. Probably we have no 3 op
add. Last chance is to use 2-op add insn. */
lra_assert (x != y && x != z);
- emit_move_insn (x, z);
- insn = gen_add2_insn (x, y);
+ emit_move_insn (x, y);
+ insn = gen_add2_insn (x, z);
emit_insn (insn);
}
else
Could you add a comment to lra_emit_add saying why it has to be this
way round (move y, add z)?
Ping.
I am going to add a comment when I submit my next patch (it will happen
today or tomorrow). The reason is simple as address segment is stored
in y not in z and generation of addition of address segment to pseudo
can fail (that is what happens for the PR).
Thanks, Richard.
