On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 10:39:29AM -0500, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> Ok. I guess there is only one option to use one pattern for LRA
> and reload without ?? in register alternative. In this case, reload
> and LRA will actually work according to GCC documentation (LRA
> treats ? cost as the cost of one reload, reload does the same but
> not in this case).
>
> That was my first solution but you were not comfortable with this too.
>
> Changing LRA most sensitive code to behave (wrongly in this case)
> as reload is not an option for me.
>
> So I don't know what to do anymore to fix this 2 failures.
Could it be handled by enabled attribute? You'd duplicate the
alternatives, one would be with the ??, one without, and enabled
attribute on the insn would be 1 for the first two alternatives
and also for the ?? alternative if not LRA, or non-?? alternative
if LRA.
Jakub
