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 0B53E39BF898; Wed,  4 Nov 2020 16:23:28 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0B53E39BF898
From: "qing.zhao at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/97715] [11 Regression] ICE in insn_default_length, at
 config/i386/i386.md:15325 since r11-4578-gd10f3e900b0377b4
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 16:23:28 +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: qing.zhao at oracle dot com
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: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-97715-4-KHq3EOz5DU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-97715-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-97715-4@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: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 16:23:29 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97715

--- Comment #17 from Qing Zhao <qing.zhao at oracle dot com> ---
> On Nov 4, 2020, at 10:08 AM, ubizjak at gmail dot com <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.g=
nu.org> wrote:
>>=20
>> I used the following in middle end to exclude fixed registers from being
>> zeroed:
>>      if (fixed_regs[regno])
>>        continue;
>> So, looks like that ST registers are not included in fixed_regs when
>> !TARGET_80387.=20
>> Is this a bug in gcc?
>=20
> fixed_regs members are only set with -ffixed-REG, in addition to members,
> initialized by the target-dependent initializer. It is not a bug.
Yes.

Then, we need to check whether the register is in =E2=80=9Caccessible_reg_s=
et=E2=80=9D to
exclude it from being
Zeroed as Jacub suggested in  Comment #14.  That looks like a better fix.=