On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 08:29:17PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for stage1
>> > (while the previous patch looks simple enough that I'd like to see it in
>> > 6.x, this one IMHO can wa
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 08:29:17PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for stage1
> > (while the previous patch looks simple enough that I'd like to see it in
> > 6.x, this one IMHO can wait).
>
> Yes, please. This is not a regression.
>
> > 201
2016-05-02 Jakub Jelinek
PR rtl-optimization/70467
* cse.c (cse_insn): Handle no-op MEM moves after folding.
* gcc.target/i386/pr70467-1.c: New test.
I seem to have a memory of acking this before. Certainly looks OK.
Bernd
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 08:29:17PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for stage1
> > (while the previous patch looks simple enough that I'd like to see it in
> > 6.x, this one IMHO can wait).
>
> Yes, please. This is not a regression.
So, I'm r
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The previous patch apparently isn't enough for TImode, because
> we don't even allow the CONST_WIDE_INT operands in there, it uses
> "e" constraint and similar predicate. All we care about is that
> both of the words of the argument c
Hi!
The previous patch apparently isn't enough for TImode, because
we don't even allow the CONST_WIDE_INT operands in there, it uses
"e" constraint and similar predicate. All we care about is that
both of the words of the argument can be expressed as addq/adcq/subq/sbbq
immediates, so this patch
