Yvan Roux <yvan.r...@linaro.org> writes: > @@ -5786,7 +5796,11 @@ get_index_scale (const struct address_info *info) > && info->index_term == &XEXP (index, 0)) > return INTVAL (XEXP (index, 1)); > > - if (GET_CODE (index) == ASHIFT > + if ((GET_CODE (index) == ASHIFT > + || GET_CODE (index) == ASHIFTRT > + || GET_CODE (index) == LSHIFTRT > + || GET_CODE (index) == ROTATE > + || GET_CODE (index) == ROTATERT) > && CONST_INT_P (XEXP (index, 1)) > && info->index_term == &XEXP (index, 0)) > return (HOST_WIDE_INT) 1 << INTVAL (XEXP (index, 1));
This bit doesn't look right. The scale is only 1 << N for (ashift ... N). I think we have to stick to returning zero for the other codes. The other two (snipped) rtlanal.c hunks like fine to me FWIW. Maybe now would be a good time to add an "is this a shift code?" predicate though, if we don't have one already. Thanks, Richard
