On 11/04/2011 05:40 PM, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> Actually, it's not that simple. The not:SI operaration can be generated
> by combine. But it won't generate (xor:SI (reg:SI foo) (const_int -1)) .
>
> So I need one_cmplsi2_i as combiner pattern no matter what.
Oh, right. I forgot about combine n
Quoting Joern Rennecke :
Quoting Richard Henderson :
>>> (define_expand "one_cmplsi2"
...
Why not combine these? I'm pretty sure that expand_binop will try the xor
solution all on its own.
Actually, it's expand_unop, and it doesn't. Left to its own devices, it
will generate a libcall i
