Commit 0ba846c7 by Richard Stallman

(eliminate_regs_in_insn): If recognition fails on modified insn,

go ahead and modify just the same.

From-SVN: r2258
parent 4a5d0fb5
......@@ -2988,20 +2988,22 @@ eliminate_regs_in_insn (insn, replace)
if (new_body != old_body)
{
/* If we had a move insn but now we don't, rerecognize it. */
if (GET_CODE (old_body) == SET && GET_CODE (SET_SRC (old_body)) == REG
&& (GET_CODE (new_body) != SET
|| GET_CODE (SET_SRC (new_body)) != REG))
if ((GET_CODE (old_body) == SET && GET_CODE (SET_SRC (old_body)) == REG
&& (GET_CODE (new_body) != SET
|| GET_CODE (SET_SRC (new_body)) != REG))
/* If this was an add insn before, rerecognize. */
||
(GET_CODE (old_body) == SET
&& GET_CODE (SET_SRC (old_body)) == PLUS))
{
if (! validate_change (insn, &PATTERN (insn), new_body, 0))
abort ();
/* If recognition fails, store the new body anyway.
It's normal to have recognition failures here
due to bizarre memory addresses; reloading will fix them. */
PATTERN (insn) = new_body;
}
/* If this was not a move insn, rerecognize. */
else if (GET_CODE (old_body) != SET
|| GET_CODE (SET_SRC (old_body)) != PLUS
|| ! validate_change (insn, &PATTERN (insn), new_body, 0))
else
PATTERN (insn) = new_body;
/* ??? Is it really correct to store the new body anyway
if validate_change fails? Shouldn't this abort instead? */
if (replace && REG_NOTES (insn))
REG_NOTES (insn) = eliminate_regs (REG_NOTES (insn), 0, NULL_RTX);
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment