Weird handling of r+r (pre-inc) addresses

[Hal Finkel]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ulrich Weigand" <Ulrich.Weigand at de.ibm.com>
> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>
> Cc: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu, "Bill Schmidt" <wschmidt at us.ibm.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 10:01:49 AM
> Subject: Re: Weird handling of r+r (pre-inc) addresses
> 
> Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote on 22.03.2013 07:47:36:
> 
> > These patches LGTM, regarding this last point:
> >
> > I think that in cases where the returned base/offset will fail
> > these
> > checks, we should check the swapped ordering and return that when
> > possible. This will mean repeating the checks in the target code,
> > but they're fairly small (pasted here for the convenience of list
> readers):
> 
> With this change, we now actually get somewhat *more* pre-inc
> accesses than before ...

Great, thanks!

 -Hal

> 
> I've now checked in the patches (including this change).
> 
> Thanks,
> Ulrich
> 
>