diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index 205afa8e1803eb3073a26157581faceebf5a59aa..722b94bff35b498c3279c87fdd98962857285889 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,14 @@
+2016-11-16 Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
+ Alan Hayward <alan.hayward@arm.com>
+ David Sherwood <david.sherwood@arm.com>
+
+ * combine.c (maybe_swap_commutative_operands): New function.
+ (combine_simplify_rtx): Use it.
+ (change_zero_ext): Likewise.
+ (make_compound_operation_int): New function, split out of...
+ (make_compound_operation): ...here. Use
+ maybe_swap_commutative_operands for both.
+
2016-11-16 Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
* arm/arm-fpus.def (vfpv2): New FPU, currently an alias for 'vfp'.
diff --git a/gcc/combine.c b/gcc/combine.c
index 19ef52f70dda440c1a36032993b14fc914c4287f..ca5ddae9c78c22a6dfce04367015c7ebb855dfa0 100644
--- a/gcc/combine.c
+++ b/gcc/combine.c
@@ -5479,6 +5479,21 @@ subst (rtx x, rtx from, rtx to, int in_dest, int in_cond, int unique_copy)
return x;
}
+/* If X is a commutative operation whose operands are not in the canonical
+ order, use substitutions to swap them. */
+
+static void
+maybe_swap_commutative_operands (rtx x)
+{
+ if (COMMUTATIVE_ARITH_P (x)
+ && swap_commutative_operands_p (XEXP (x, 0), XEXP (x, 1)))
+ {
+ rtx temp = XEXP (x, 0);
+ SUBST (XEXP (x, 0), XEXP (x, 1));
+ SUBST (XEXP (x, 1), temp);
+ }
+}
+
/* Simplify X, a piece of RTL. We just operate on the expression at the
outer level; call `subst' to simplify recursively. Return the new
expression.
@@ -5498,13 +5513,7 @@ combine_simplify_rtx (rtx x, machine_mode op0_mode, int in_dest,
/* If this is a commutative operation, put a constant last and a complex
expression first. We don't need to do this for comparisons here. */
- if (COMMUTATIVE_ARITH_P (x)
- && swap_commutative_operands_p (XEXP (x, 0), XEXP (x, 1)))
- {
- temp = XEXP (x, 0);
- SUBST (XEXP (x, 0), XEXP (x, 1));
- SUBST (XEXP (x, 1), temp);
- }
+ maybe_swap_commutative_operands (x);
/* Try to fold this expression in case we have constants that weren't
present before. */
@@ -7744,55 +7753,38 @@ extract_left_shift (rtx x, int count)
return 0;
}
-/* Look at the expression rooted at X. Look for expressions
- equivalent to ZERO_EXTRACT, SIGN_EXTRACT, ZERO_EXTEND, SIGN_EXTEND.
- Form these expressions.
-
- Return the new rtx, usually just X.
+/* Subroutine of make_compound_operation. *X_PTR is the rtx at the current
+ level of the expression and MODE is its mode. IN_CODE is as for
+ make_compound_operation. *NEXT_CODE_PTR is the value of IN_CODE
+ that should be used when recursing on operands of *X_PTR.
- Also, for machines like the VAX that don't have logical shift insns,
- try to convert logical to arithmetic shift operations in cases where
- they are equivalent. This undoes the canonicalizations to logical
- shifts done elsewhere.
+ There are two possible actions:
- We try, as much as possible, to re-use rtl expressions to save memory.
+ - Return null. This tells the caller to recurse on *X_PTR with IN_CODE
+ equal to *NEXT_CODE_PTR, after which *X_PTR holds the final value.
- IN_CODE says what kind of expression we are processing. Normally, it is
- SET. In a memory address it is MEM. When processing the arguments of
- a comparison or a COMPARE against zero, it is COMPARE, or EQ if more
- precisely it is an equality comparison against zero. */
+ - Return a new rtx, which the caller returns directly. */
-rtx
-make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
+static rtx
+make_compound_operation_int (machine_mode mode, rtx *x_ptr,
+ enum rtx_code in_code,
+ enum rtx_code *next_code_ptr)
{
+ rtx x = *x_ptr;
+ enum rtx_code next_code = *next_code_ptr;
enum rtx_code code = GET_CODE (x);
- machine_mode mode = GET_MODE (x);
int mode_width = GET_MODE_PRECISION (mode);
rtx rhs, lhs;
- enum rtx_code next_code;
- int i, j;
rtx new_rtx = 0;
+ int i;
rtx tem;
- const char *fmt;
bool equality_comparison = false;
- /* PR rtl-optimization/70944. */
- if (VECTOR_MODE_P (mode))
- return x;
-
- /* Select the code to be used in recursive calls. Once we are inside an
- address, we stay there. If we have a comparison, set to COMPARE,
- but once inside, go back to our default of SET. */
-
if (in_code == EQ)
{
equality_comparison = true;
in_code = COMPARE;
}
- next_code = (code == MEM ? MEM
- : ((code == COMPARE || COMPARISON_P (x))
- && XEXP (x, 1) == const0_rtx) ? COMPARE
- : in_code == COMPARE ? SET : in_code);
/* Process depending on the code of this operation. If NEW is set
nonzero, it will be returned. */
@@ -7804,8 +7796,7 @@ make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
an address. */
if (in_code == MEM && CONST_INT_P (XEXP (x, 1))
&& INTVAL (XEXP (x, 1)) < HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT
- && INTVAL (XEXP (x, 1)) >= 0
- && SCALAR_INT_MODE_P (mode))
+ && INTVAL (XEXP (x, 1)) >= 0)
{
HOST_WIDE_INT count = INTVAL (XEXP (x, 1));
HOST_WIDE_INT multval = HOST_WIDE_INT_1 << count;
@@ -7826,8 +7817,7 @@ make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
rhs = XEXP (x, 1);
lhs = make_compound_operation (lhs, next_code);
rhs = make_compound_operation (rhs, next_code);
- if (GET_CODE (lhs) == MULT && GET_CODE (XEXP (lhs, 0)) == NEG
- && SCALAR_INT_MODE_P (mode))
+ if (GET_CODE (lhs) == MULT && GET_CODE (XEXP (lhs, 0)) == NEG)
{
tem = simplify_gen_binary (MULT, mode, XEXP (XEXP (lhs, 0), 0),
XEXP (lhs, 1));
@@ -7846,22 +7836,20 @@ make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
{
SUBST (XEXP (x, 0), lhs);
SUBST (XEXP (x, 1), rhs);
- goto maybe_swap;
}
- x = gen_lowpart (mode, new_rtx);
- goto maybe_swap;
+ maybe_swap_commutative_operands (x);
+ return x;
case MINUS:
lhs = XEXP (x, 0);
rhs = XEXP (x, 1);
lhs = make_compound_operation (lhs, next_code);
rhs = make_compound_operation (rhs, next_code);
- if (GET_CODE (rhs) == MULT && GET_CODE (XEXP (rhs, 0)) == NEG
- && SCALAR_INT_MODE_P (mode))
+ if (GET_CODE (rhs) == MULT && GET_CODE (XEXP (rhs, 0)) == NEG)
{
tem = simplify_gen_binary (MULT, mode, XEXP (XEXP (rhs, 0), 0),
XEXP (rhs, 1));
- new_rtx = simplify_gen_binary (PLUS, mode, tem, lhs);
+ return simplify_gen_binary (PLUS, mode, tem, lhs);
}
else if (GET_CODE (rhs) == MULT
&& (CONST_INT_P (XEXP (rhs, 1)) && INTVAL (XEXP (rhs, 1)) < 0))
@@ -7870,7 +7858,7 @@ make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
simplify_gen_unary (NEG, mode,
XEXP (rhs, 1),
mode));
- new_rtx = simplify_gen_binary (PLUS, mode, tem, lhs);
+ return simplify_gen_binary (PLUS, mode, tem, lhs);
}
else
{
@@ -7878,7 +7866,6 @@ make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
SUBST (XEXP (x, 1), rhs);
return x;
}
- return gen_lowpart (mode, new_rtx);
case AND:
/* If the second operand is not a constant, we can't do anything
@@ -8171,15 +8158,60 @@ make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
}
if (new_rtx)
+ *x_ptr = gen_lowpart (mode, new_rtx);
+ *next_code_ptr = next_code;
+ return NULL_RTX;
+}
+
+/* Look at the expression rooted at X. Look for expressions
+ equivalent to ZERO_EXTRACT, SIGN_EXTRACT, ZERO_EXTEND, SIGN_EXTEND.
+ Form these expressions.
+
+ Return the new rtx, usually just X.
+
+ Also, for machines like the VAX that don't have logical shift insns,
+ try to convert logical to arithmetic shift operations in cases where
+ they are equivalent. This undoes the canonicalizations to logical
+ shifts done elsewhere.
+
+ We try, as much as possible, to re-use rtl expressions to save memory.
+
+ IN_CODE says what kind of expression we are processing. Normally, it is
+ SET. In a memory address it is MEM. When processing the arguments of
+ a comparison or a COMPARE against zero, it is COMPARE, or EQ if more
+ precisely it is an equality comparison against zero. */
+
+rtx
+make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
+{
+ enum rtx_code code = GET_CODE (x);
+ const char *fmt;
+ int i, j;
+ enum rtx_code next_code;
+ rtx new_rtx, tem;
+
+ /* Select the code to be used in recursive calls. Once we are inside an
+ address, we stay there. If we have a comparison, set to COMPARE,
+ but once inside, go back to our default of SET. */
+
+ next_code = (code == MEM ? MEM
+ : ((code == COMPARE || COMPARISON_P (x))
+ && XEXP (x, 1) == const0_rtx) ? COMPARE
+ : in_code == COMPARE || in_code == EQ ? SET : in_code);
+
+ if (SCALAR_INT_MODE_P (GET_MODE (x)))
{
- x = gen_lowpart (mode, new_rtx);
+ rtx new_rtx = make_compound_operation_int (GET_MODE (x), &x,
+ in_code, &next_code);
+ if (new_rtx)
+ return new_rtx;
code = GET_CODE (x);
}
/* Now recursively process each operand of this operation. We need to
handle ZERO_EXTEND specially so that we don't lose track of the
inner mode. */
- if (GET_CODE (x) == ZERO_EXTEND)
+ if (code == ZERO_EXTEND)
{
new_rtx = make_compound_operation (XEXP (x, 0), next_code);
tem = simplify_const_unary_operation (ZERO_EXTEND, GET_MODE (x),
@@ -8204,17 +8236,7 @@ make_compound_operation (rtx x, enum rtx_code in_code)
SUBST (XVECEXP (x, i, j), new_rtx);
}
- maybe_swap:
- /* If this is a commutative operation, the changes to the operands
- may have made it noncanonical. */
- if (COMMUTATIVE_ARITH_P (x)
- && swap_commutative_operands_p (XEXP (x, 0), XEXP (x, 1)))
- {
- tem = XEXP (x, 0);
- SUBST (XEXP (x, 0), XEXP (x, 1));
- SUBST (XEXP (x, 1), tem);
- }
-
+ maybe_swap_commutative_operands (x);
return x;
}
@@ -11220,16 +11242,7 @@ change_zero_ext (rtx pat)
if (changed)
FOR_EACH_SUBRTX_PTR (iter, array, src, NONCONST)
- {
- rtx x = **iter;
- if (COMMUTATIVE_ARITH_P (x)
- && swap_commutative_operands_p (XEXP (x, 0), XEXP (x, 1)))
- {
- rtx tem = XEXP (x, 0);
- SUBST (XEXP (x, 0), XEXP (x, 1));
- SUBST (XEXP (x, 1), tem);
- }
- }
+ maybe_swap_commutative_operands (**iter);
rtx *dst = &SET_DEST (pat);
if (GET_CODE (*dst) == ZERO_EXTRACT