public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/103676] [10/11/12 Regression] internal compiler error: in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2671
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 17:00:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-103676-4-qrWCN2Qmf8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-103676-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103676

--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
If we consider such an inline asm invalid, we could error on it, ICE is not the
right thing.  But what exactly should we error on?  Alternative containing
multiple register classes for multi-word operands is still something used quite
commonly in real-world, the problem is when the RA assigns it a reg spanning
across those.  Or do most backends restrict multi-word regs to start at a reg
number divisible by the number of words they need?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-01-17 17:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-12 22:32 [Bug target/103676] New: " patrick.oppenlander at gmail dot com
2021-12-12 23:31 ` [Bug target/103676] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-12 23:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-12 23:54 ` patrick.oppenlander at gmail dot com
2021-12-12 23:58 ` patrick.oppenlander at gmail dot com
2021-12-13 22:56 ` patrick.oppenlander at gmail dot com
2021-12-13 23:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-13 23:13 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-14  0:48 ` patrick.oppenlander at gmail dot com
2021-12-14  0:48 ` patrick.oppenlander at gmail dot com
2021-12-14  0:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-14  0:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-14  1:16 ` patrick.oppenlander at gmail dot com
2021-12-14  1:17 ` patrick.oppenlander at gmail dot com
2021-12-14  1:48 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-14  1:50 ` [Bug target/103676] [10/11/12 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-14  2:07 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-14  2:11 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-14  2:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-29 17:02 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-29 17:06 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-17 12:46 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-17 16:43 ` vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-17 17:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-01-18 13:38 ` vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-21 18:37 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-28 16:38 ` [Bug target/103676] [10/11 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 10:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-07 10:41 ` [Bug target/103676] [11 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-103676-4-qrWCN2Qmf8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).