On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 11:31:27AM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Hm, OTOH, is this condition correct:
>
> case TYPE_LEA:
> if (TARGET_APX_NDD && <nf_applied>)
> return "%{nf%} add{<imodesuffix>}\t{%2, %1, %0|%0, %1, %2}";
> else
> return "#";
>
> Should it be "TARGET_APX_NDD || <nf_applied>"?
The pattern is weird, but TARGET_APX_NDD || <nf_applied> would be wrong.
Without TARGET_APX_NDD there is no 3 operand add, so we can't use that.
Of course, question is if there will be CPUs with just APX-NF and not
APX-NDD or with just APX-NDD and not APX-NF.
I'd say it is a bad idea to have the "lea" variant come before the
3 apx_ndd variants, if the lea variant came last, then at least the r <- r, l
case would be covered for TARGET_APX_NDD by the earlier (but now later)
r <- rje, r variant and could then emit either the 3 operand add or 3
operand add with {nf}. Anyway, with the current position it could also be
if (TARGET_APX_NDD)
return "<nf_prefix>add{<imodesuffix>}\t{%2, %1, %0|%0, %1, %2}";
else
{
operands[3] = gen_rtx_PLUS (<MODE>mode, operands[1], operands[2]);
return "lea{<imodesuffix>}\t{%E3, %0|%0, %E3}";
}
Jakub
