--- /dev/null
+;; Operand and operator predicates for the GCC MMIX port.
+;; Copyright (C) 2005, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+
+;; This file is part of GCC.
+;;
+;; GCC is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+;; it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+;; the Free Software Foundation; either version 3, or (at your option)
+;; any later version.
+;;
+;; GCC is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+;; but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
+;; GNU General Public License for more details.
+;;
+;; You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+;; along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
+;; <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
+
+;; True if this is a foldable comparison operator
+;; - one where a the result of (compare:CC (reg) (const_int 0)) can be
+;; replaced by (reg). */
+
+(define_predicate "mmix_foldable_comparison_operator"
+ (match_code "ne, eq, ge, gt, le, lt, gtu, leu")
+{
+ RTX_CODE code = GET_CODE (op);
+
+ if (mode == VOIDmode)
+ mode = GET_MODE (op);
+
+ /* This little bit is why the body of this predicate is kept as C. */
+ if (mode == VOIDmode)
+ mode = GET_MODE (XEXP (op, 0));
+
+ return ((mode == CCmode || mode == DImode)
+ && (code == NE || code == EQ || code == GE || code == GT
+ || code == LE || code == LT))
+ /* FIXME: This may be a stupid trick. What happens when GCC wants to
+ reverse the condition? Can it do that by itself? Maybe it can
+ even reverse the condition to fit a foldable one in the first
+ place? */
+ || (mode == CC_UNSmode && (code == GTU || code == LEU));
+})
+
+;; Like comparison_operator, but only true if this comparison operator is
+;; applied to a valid mode. Needed to avoid jump.c generating invalid
+;; code with -ffast-math (gcc.dg/20001228-1.c).
+
+(define_predicate "mmix_comparison_operator"
+ (match_operand 0 "comparison_operator")
+{
+ RTX_CODE code = GET_CODE (op);
+
+ /* Comparison operators usually don't have a mode, but let's try and get
+ one anyway for the day that changes. */
+ if (mode == VOIDmode)
+ mode = GET_MODE (op);
+
+ /* Get the mode from the first operand if we don't have one.
+ Also the reason why we do this in C. */
+ if (mode == VOIDmode)
+ mode = GET_MODE (XEXP (op, 0));
+
+ /* FIXME: This needs to be kept in sync with the tables in
+ mmix_output_condition. */
+ return
+ mode == VOIDmode
+ || (mode == CC_FUNmode
+ && (code == ORDERED || code == UNORDERED))
+ || (mode == CC_FPmode
+ && (code == GT || code == LT))
+ || (mode == CC_FPEQmode
+ && (code == NE || code == EQ))
+ || (mode == CC_UNSmode
+ && (code == GEU || code == GTU || code == LEU || code == LTU))
+ || (mode == CCmode
+ && (code == NE || code == EQ || code == GE || code == GT
+ || code == LE || code == LT))
+ || (mode == DImode
+ && (code == NE || code == EQ || code == GE || code == GT
+ || code == LE || code == LT || code == LEU || code == GTU));
+})
+
+;; True if this is a register with a condition-code mode.
+
+(define_predicate "mmix_reg_cc_operand"
+ (and (match_operand 0 "register_operand")
+ (ior (match_test "GET_MODE (op) == CCmode")
+ (ior (match_test "GET_MODE (op) == CC_UNSmode")
+ (ior (match_test "GET_MODE (op) == CC_FPmode")
+ (ior (match_test "GET_MODE (op) == CC_FPEQmode")
+ (match_test "GET_MODE (op) == CC_FUNmode")))))))
+
+;; True if this is an address_operand or a symbolic operand.
+
+(define_predicate "mmix_symbolic_or_address_operand"
+ (match_code "symbol_ref, label_ref, const, subreg, reg, plus")
+{
+ switch (GET_CODE (op))
+ {
+ case SYMBOL_REF:
+ case LABEL_REF:
+ return 1;
+ case CONST:
+ /* The reason why this body still is C. */
+ op = XEXP (op, 0);
+ if ((GET_CODE (XEXP (op, 0)) == SYMBOL_REF
+ || GET_CODE (XEXP (op, 0)) == LABEL_REF)
+ && (GET_CODE (XEXP (op, 1)) == CONST_INT
+ || (GET_CODE (XEXP (op, 1)) == CONST_DOUBLE
+ && GET_MODE (XEXP (op, 1)) == VOIDmode)))
+ return 1;
+ /* Fall through. */
+ default:
+ return address_operand (op, mode);
+ }
+})
+
+;; True if this is a register or CONST_INT (or CONST_DOUBLE for DImode).
+;; We could narrow the value down with a couple of predicates, but that
+;; doesn't seem to be worth it at the moment.
+
+(define_predicate "mmix_reg_or_constant_operand"
+ (ior (match_operand 0 "register_operand")
+ (ior (match_code "const_int")
+ (and (match_code "const_double")
+ (match_test "GET_MODE (op) == VOIDmode")))))
+
+;; True if this is a register or 0 (int or float).
+
+(define_predicate "mmix_reg_or_0_operand"
+ (ior
+ (match_operand 0 "register_operand")
+ (ior
+ (and (match_code "const_int")
+ (match_test "op == const0_rtx"))
+ (and
+ (match_code "const_double")
+ ;; FIXME: Is mode calculation necessary and correct?
+ (match_test
+ "op == CONST0_RTX (mode == VOIDmode ? GET_MODE (op) : mode)")))))
+
+;; True if this is a register or an int 0..255.
+
+(define_predicate "mmix_reg_or_8bit_operand"
+ (ior
+ (match_operand 0 "register_operand")
+ (and (match_code "const_int")
+ (match_test "CONST_OK_FOR_LETTER_P (INTVAL (op), 'I')"))))
projects / msp430-gcc.git / blobdiff