From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2733 invoked by alias); 7 Apr 2014 22:11:35 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 2673 invoked by uid 48); 7 Apr 2014 22:11:31 -0000 From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/60657] [4.9 Regression] ICE: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 22:11:00 -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: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: law at redhat dot com X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg00511.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- While the improved predicates make the first IN_RANGE tests unneeded, IMHO it should still verify what the second IN_RANGE tests did, i.e. that operands[2] is not 0 and at most 32 - third operand. I think the combiner just blindly tries to match and simplify, all the verification is performed through trying to recog the insn.