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 7353D3850422; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 20:13:14 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7353D3850422
From: "vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/97701] [10/11 Regression] aarch64: ICE in
 extract_constrain_insn since r10-4447-g095f78c6
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 20:13:14 +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: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-97701-4-WWTZlYHWFC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-97701-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-97701-4@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: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 20:13:14 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97701

--- Comment #11 from Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #9)
> > I've committed the patch only to the trunk.  I believe the bug on the t=
runk
> > is still present but not triggered by the test.
>=20
> See #c5, by using ? 2 : 1 instead of ? 2 : 0 it should trigger it on the
> trunk too.

Ok. Thank you, Jakub.

I've just checked the modified test with the patch on the trunk.  The test =
is
successfully compiled.

I'll modify the test on the trunk.=