Hi, > Or perhaps this could be another manifestation of the "cse gets confused by > reg_equal notes on subparts of dimode pseudos if no movdi pattern is defined > in the backend" bug[*]? Pranav, is there a movdi pattern in your backend? > There needs to be one, gcc does get it wrong if you rely on it to break > everything down to si-sized movs.
Yes, It looks like a similar problem, but there seems to be no consensus on a correct solution to this problem. I couldnt find the bug number but this thread describes the exact same problem ( but with REG_EQUIV notes). http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-02/msg01372.html Thanks, Pranav
