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 596A83858424; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 13:24:11 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 596A83858424
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1712755451;
	bh=ShEcFO94QE1uzrKPesVvrD+ne1k8t/dFaK2K66FtkEw=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=FWtHHg9aP0xJpg9S9RIRYu+qXSNzzrVHf4bv5Uc1M56R+/1sF0mRgZvp50/3aeMFz
	 oyiFP7tdejnvTuCO3yOc2wDk6M6sMB/PXGpCLVG9MAhR1VM9zrnPBmfxaful44qHXh
	 clBlf6Yq+0pdY3pTPP+KHmUM5g+fIQtYfod3pcUM=
From: "rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/114664] -fno-omit-frame-pointer causes an ICE
 during the build of the greenlet package
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 13:24:09 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rsandifo 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: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-114664-4-be4K4oPouR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114664-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114664-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D114664

--- Comment #10 from Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #7)
> Then that would seem to indicate that mentioning the frame pointer reg in
> the asm clobber list is an error
Yeah, I agree it's an error.  The PR says =E2=80=9CICE=E2=80=9D, but is the=
re an internal
error?  The =E2=80=9Ccannot be used in =E2=80=98asm=E2=80=99 here=E2=80=9D =
is a normal user-facing error,
albeit with bad error recovery, leading us to report the same thing multiple
times.

> but how are users supposed to know whether
> -fno-omit-frame-pointer is in effect or not?  I've looked and there is no
> pre-defined macro a user could check.
That might be a useful thing to have, but if the programmer has no control =
over
the build flags (i.e. cannot require/force -fomit-frame-pointer) then I thi=
nk
the asm has to take care to save and restore the frame pointer itself.

Dropping "31" from the asm means that the asm must preserve the register.=20
Things will go badly if the asm doesn't do that.=