From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 6BBBF385DC0D; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 12:16:37 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6BBBF385DC0D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1586866597; bh=/IKZ66f8NffRAzbr/8VwIiFctUSu9zq4BAc/94dUTsI=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=TQon66jPyi804tHOZBjW7QBlmB5YN1a6m7qZT0cB6YiEj09XS2s6raA9ose17psJv XGlC/wH+sWcADLDt1xKVWwK2AKZqbKKv1cVqJBhFl8HlOFeclQxlHHiZMUulKkHbbD +nwFYtDBEmzom1TsV5RM4i5BsIxxzdxKSL1/JzTs= From: "clyon at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/94538] [10 Regression] ICE: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.c:2223 (insn does not satisfy its constraints) with -mcpu=cortex-m23 -mslow-flash-data Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 12:16:37 +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: 10.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 12:16:37 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94538 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- > Adding Christophe. I'm thinking the best approach right now is to revert > given -mpure-code doesn't work at all on Thumb-1 targets - it still emits > literal pools, switch tables etc. That's not pure code! Do you have testcases that show these failures? I did check some of the problematic testcases in the GCC testsuite when I committed that patch. Did I miss some of them? Can you point me to offending testcases and compiler options so that I can reproduce them?=