From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9593 invoked by alias); 15 Mar 2005 12:35:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9508 invoked by uid 48); 15 Mar 2005 12:34:58 -0000 Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:35:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050315123458.9507.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "uros at kss-loka dot si" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050112133406.19398.uros@kss-loka.si> References: <20050112133406.19398.uros@kss-loka.si> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/19398] secondary reloads don't consider "m" alternatives X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg01793.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-03-15 12:34 ------- (In reply to comment #6) > But a peephole solution would fix a single backend, whilst I assume any kind of Also, every insn pattern that accepts memory input would need an appropriate peephole2 pattern... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19398