On 07/06/2016 01:42 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
* Richard Sandiford [2016-07-04 09:47:20 +0100]:
Thanks for removing the duplicated error check for unknown predicates.
I think that error gets reported later though, so we should check for
null here:
return pred && pred->special;
OK with th
* Richard Sandiford [2016-07-04 09:47:20 +0100]:
> Andrew Burgess writes:
> > +/* Return true if OPERAND is a MATCH_OPERAND using a special predicate
> > + function. */
> > +
> > +static bool
> > +special_predicate_operand_p (rtx operand)
> > +{
> > + if (GET_CODE (operand) == MATCH_OPERAND)
Andrew Burgess writes:
> +/* Return true if OPERAND is a MATCH_OPERAND using a special predicate
> + function. */
> +
> +static bool
> +special_predicate_operand_p (rtx operand)
> +{
> + if (GET_CODE (operand) == MATCH_OPERAND)
> +{
> + const char *pred_name = predicate_name (operand)
* Richard Sandiford [2016-06-15 19:07:56 +0100]:
> Andrew Burgess writes:
> > In md.texi it says:
> >
> > Predicates written with @code{define_special_predicate} do not get any
> > automatic mode checks, and are treated as having special mode handling
> > by @command{genrecog}.
> >
> > How
Andrew Burgess writes:
> In md.texi it says:
>
> Predicates written with @code{define_special_predicate} do not get any
> automatic mode checks, and are treated as having special mode handling
> by @command{genrecog}.
>
> However, in genrecog, when validating a SET pattern, if either the
> s
In md.texi it says:
Predicates written with @code{define_special_predicate} do not get any
automatic mode checks, and are treated as having special mode handling
by @command{genrecog}.
However, in genrecog, when validating a SET pattern, if either the
source or destination is missing a mode
