From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id BCFAE3858C20; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:22:49 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BCFAE3858C20
From: "vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/104400] [12 Regression] v850e lra/reload
 failure after recent change
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:22:49 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ra
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-104400-4-bPIfnzelfw@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-104400-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-104400-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:22:49 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D104400

--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #2)
> NP on the timing.  My biggest concern (as always) is whether or not this =
is
> a generic issue or a bug in the v850 target files.  The former is obvious=
ly
> much more important.
>=20
> If it starts to look like a target issue, then feel free to punt it to me=
.=20
> While I don't know the v850 fp bits, I have retained a fair amount of
> generic v850 knowledge over the decades :-)

It is my patch pitfall for very unusual v850 insn constraint 'e!r' where e =
is
even general reg and subset of r.

I have a patch to fix this and after testing it I'll commit it today or
tomorrow.=