Commit 8cb0906b by Segher Boessenkool

doc: Insn splitting by combine

The combine pass is perfectly happy if a splitter splits to just one
instruction (instead of two).


	* doc/md.texi (Insn Splitting): Fix combiner documentation.

From-SVN: r277866
parent b7689b96
2019-10-26 Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> 2019-11-05 Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
* doc/md.texi (Insn Splitting): Fix combiner documentation.
2019-11-05 Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
PR tree-optimization/91825 PR tree-optimization/91825
* expmed.c: Reduce -Wmaybe-uninitialized to warning. * expmed.c: Reduce -Wmaybe-uninitialized to warning.
...@@ -8371,7 +8371,7 @@ case that the pattern is @emph{not} matched by any @code{define_insn}. ...@@ -8371,7 +8371,7 @@ case that the pattern is @emph{not} matched by any @code{define_insn}.
The combiner pass first tries to split a single @code{set} expression The combiner pass first tries to split a single @code{set} expression
and then the same @code{set} expression inside a @code{parallel}, but and then the same @code{set} expression inside a @code{parallel}, but
followed by a @code{clobber} of a pseudo-reg to use as a scratch followed by a @code{clobber} of a pseudo-reg to use as a scratch
register. In these cases, the combiner expects exactly two new insn register. In these cases, the combiner expects exactly one or two new insn
patterns to be generated. It will verify that these patterns match some patterns to be generated. It will verify that these patterns match some
@code{define_insn} definitions, so you need not do this test in the @code{define_insn} definitions, so you need not do this test in the
@code{define_split} (of course, there is no point in writing a @code{define_split} (of course, there is no point in writing a
......
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