On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:55:24AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > No, we should allow both integer and floating point insns for integer stores > > always. We just get the cost estimates slightly wrong now, apparently. > > Note that my proof of concept patch doesn't disallow them either... So what > do you suggest? Just putting back the '*' modifiers in the DI patterns?
Yeah, something like that. It will need some serious testing, to make sure we don't regress (including not regressing what that patch that took them away was meant to do). I can arrange some testing, will you do the patch though? > As a matter of fact there are still present in the SI pattern. Yeah. It might not hurt at all to put them back in the DI as well. Here's hoping. Thanks, Segher
