|
|
@@ -2196,7 +2196,7 @@ unit aoptx86;
|
|
|
exit;
|
|
|
end
|
|
|
end;
|
|
|
- end;
|
|
|
+ end;
|
|
|
if GetNextInstructionUsingReg(p,hp1,taicpu(p).oper[1]^.reg) then
|
|
|
begin
|
|
|
if MatchInstruction(hp1,[A_VFMADDPD,
|
|
|
@@ -2273,7 +2273,7 @@ unit aoptx86;
|
|
|
if not(RegUsedAfterInstruction(taicpu(p).oper[1]^.reg,hp2,TmpUsedRegs)) then
|
|
|
begin
|
|
|
taicpu(hp1).loadoper(2,taicpu(p).oper[0]^);
|
|
|
- RemoveCurrentP(p, hp1); // <-- Is this actually safe? hp1 is not necessarily the next instruction. [Kit]
|
|
|
+ RemoveCurrentP(p);
|
|
|
RemoveInstruction(hp2);
|
|
|
end;
|
|
|
end
|
|
|
@@ -2310,8 +2310,10 @@ unit aoptx86;
|
|
|
{ we cannot eliminate the first move if
|
|
|
the operations uses the same register for source and dest }
|
|
|
if not(OpsEqual(taicpu(hp1).oper[1]^,taicpu(hp1).oper[0]^)) then
|
|
|
- RemoveCurrentP(p, nil);
|
|
|
- p:=hp1;
|
|
|
+ { Remember that hp1 is not necessarily the immediate
|
|
|
+ next instruction }
|
|
|
+ RemoveCurrentP(p);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
taicpu(hp1).loadoper(1, taicpu(hp2).oper[1]^);
|
|
|
RemoveInstruction(hp2);
|
|
|
result:=true;
|
|
|
@@ -2342,7 +2344,7 @@ unit aoptx86;
|
|
|
taicpu(hp1).loadoper(0, taicpu(p).oper[0]^);
|
|
|
if OpsEqual(taicpu(p).oper[1]^,taicpu(hp1).oper[1]^) then
|
|
|
taicpu(hp1).loadoper(1, taicpu(p).oper[0]^);
|
|
|
- RemoveCurrentP(p, nil);
|
|
|
+ RemoveCurrentP(p);
|
|
|
result:=true;
|
|
|
exit;
|
|
|
end;
|
J. Gareth "Curious Kit" Moreton