On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 09:07:43PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> The following fixes the testcase in cross to hppa-* as well.
>> I'll bootstrap/regtest it momentarily, ok if it passes?
>
> Now bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 09:07:43PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> The following fixes the testcase in cross to hppa-* as well.
> I'll bootstrap/regtest it momentarily, ok if it passes?
Now bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux.
> 2011-03-17 Richard Henderson
> Jakub Je
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 12:54:44PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/17/2011 11:46 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > - result = gen_rtx_PLUS (tmode, result, tmp);
> > + {
> > + if (swap_commutative_operands_p (result, tmp))
> > + result = gen_rtx_PLUS (tmode, tmp, result);
> > +
On 03/17/2011 11:46 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> - result = gen_rtx_PLUS (tmode, result, tmp);
> + {
> + if (swap_commutative_operands_p (result, tmp))
> + result = gen_rtx_PLUS (tmode, tmp, result);
> + else
> + result = gen_rtx_PLUS (tmode, result, tmp);
Hum. W
Hi!
When expanding
D.2070_29 = &MEM[(struct V *)0B].v[D.2034_30]{lb: 0 sz: 12};
expand_expr_addr_expr_1 is called with EXPAND_SUM, and result
ends up being (const_int 0) (from the NULL address), while
tmp (the offset) is a pseudo register. With EXPAND_SUM we want
to ensure no insns are emitted, s
