http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52483
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Sat Oct 26 22:07:37 2013
New Revision: 204097
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204097root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/52483
* config/sh/predicates.md
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52483
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52483
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Loads from volatile mems have been fixed on 4.9 trunk.
While working on it I noticed that stores to volatile mems have basically the
same issue. I'll try to come up with a fix for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52483
--- Comment #3 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-18
12:25:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
If that is the only reason for rejecting volatile mems, then I think it would
be OK to match volatile mems in the load/store
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52483
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52483
--- Comment #1 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-05
05:33:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Maybe a few peepholes would help here?
Sure. Peephole looks to be reasonable for this.
