hi, Richard
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Richard Sandiford
<rdsandiford@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Dinar Temirbulatov <dtemirbulatov@gmail.com> writes:
>> I found typo in the patch instead of checking *set_after != 0 it was
>> set_after != 0,  here is corrected version of patch. I retested the
>> patch without typo on mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu with no new
>> regressions.
>
> But my point was that *set_after should always be nonnull if *delayed_reg
> is.  So we shouldn't need that check anyway.
oh, sorry that I missed that.
> The patch looks OK otherwise apart from formatting (the formatting should
> be the same as in the version I suggested before:
>
>  else if (*delayed_reg != 0
>          && reg_referenced_p (*delayed_reg, pattern)
>          && !(recog_memoized (insn) == CODE_FOR_load_highdf
>               && recog_memoized (*set_after) == CODE_FOR_load_lowdf))
>
I prepared the new version of patch, re-tested new version on again on
mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu with no new regressions.
                          thanks, Dinar.