From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24487 invoked by alias); 11 Mar 2009 23:24:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 24419 invoked by uid 48); 11 Mar 2009 23:24:03 -0000 Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 23:24:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090311232403.24418.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/39431] [4.3/4.4 Regression] ICE in spill_failure, at reload1.c:2093 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-03/txt/msg00791.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-11 23:24 ------- The problem is that the memory_operand in the insns also needs registers, and as the insn before RA has (mem:DI (plus:SI (reg:SI reg1) (reg:SI reg2))), it needs 2 registers, not just one or zero. And that is already one too much. I'd say we need to handle only a subset of valid memory_operand operands in these 2 patterns, those that need zero or one register. -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-03-11 17:50:57 |2009-03-11 23:24:02 date| | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39431