Re: [PATCH] [ARC] Fix movsi_ne pattern.

On 10/30/19 3:58 AM, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote: > Hi Jeff, > >> So I'm going to have to trust you on this one. It looks like you did >> more than just reorder the alternatives. For example, the constraints >> for operand0 look significantly different to me. THey're slightly >> different for oper

RE: [PATCH] [ARC] Fix movsi_ne pattern.

Hi Jeff, > So I'm going to have to trust you on this one. It looks like you did > more than just reorder the alternatives. For example, the constraints > for operand0 look significantly different to me. THey're slightly > different for operand1 as well (LR rather than Lc). When we moved the AR

Re: [PATCH] [ARC] Fix movsi_ne pattern.

On 10/22/19 2:13 AM, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote: > From: Shahab Vahedi > > Hi Andrew, > > The movsi_ne variants are in a wrong order, leading to wrong > computation of the internal attribute "cond". Hence, to errors when > outputting annul-true or annul-false instructions. Testcase added. > > The

[PATCH] [ARC] Fix movsi_ne pattern.

From: Shahab Vahedi Hi Andrew, The movsi_ne variants are in a wrong order, leading to wrong computation of the internal attribute "cond". Hence, to errors when outputting annul-true or annul-false instructions. Testcase added. The patch needs to go for trunk and gcc9 branch. OK to apply? Claud