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 AED1738F860A; Mon, 30 May 2022 12:00:37 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AED1738F860A
From: "rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/105624] [13 Regression] ICE in final_scan_insn_1, at
 final.cc:2861 (error: could not split insn)
Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 12:00:37 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-105624-4-aH1qbk7wrA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-105624-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-105624-4@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: Mon, 30 May 2022 12:00:37 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105624

rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.or=
g> ---
FWIW, I think the problem is specific to operands that are
commutative with a non-constant operand.  For example,
suppose the pre-RA instruction had a pseudo register R matching
a register_operand and a constant C matching a const_int_operand.
If R does not get allocated, and so gets replaced by a stack slot M,
the % would allow the RA to try mapping C to the register_operand
and M to the const_int_operand.  Without a constraint on the latter,
the M mapping would seem to be valid, and reloading C into a register
might seem less costly than reloading M into a register.

The intent of the patch seemed good otherwise (and a nice clean-up).
I don't think the whole thing needed to be reverted.=