From bd8c4b14b51412daa1eaeeb11b9742cd395d5cda Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ian Lance Taylor Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 20:56:07 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Treat ZERO_EXTEND like SIGN_EXTEND in emit_unop_insn From-SVN: r13262 --- gcc/optabs.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/optabs.c b/gcc/optabs.c index d743fc8bd5ec..22a9d2a720fc 100644 --- a/gcc/optabs.c +++ b/gcc/optabs.c @@ -2388,9 +2388,10 @@ emit_unop_insn (icode, target, op0, code) op0 = protect_from_queue (op0, 0); - /* Sign extension from memory is often done specially on RISC - machines, so forcing into a register here can pessimize code. */ - if (flag_force_mem && code != SIGN_EXTEND) + /* Sign and zero extension from memory is often done specially on + RISC machines, so forcing into a register here can pessimize + code. */ + if (flag_force_mem && code != SIGN_EXTEND && code != ZERO_EXTEND) op0 = force_not_mem (op0); /* Now, if insn does not accept our operands, put them into pseudos. */