From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rsandifo@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7506388E825;
 Tue,  5 May 2020 09:07:24 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org E7506388E825
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gcc.gnu.org
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=rsandifo@gcc.gnu.org
Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14])
 by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BB1F30E;
 Tue,  5 May 2020 02:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (e121540-lin.manchester.arm.com [10.32.98.126])
 by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 182D53F305;
 Tue,  5 May 2020 02:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Richard Sandiford <rsandifo@gcc.gnu.org>
To: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Mail-Followup-To: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>,
 gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, richard.sandiford@arm.com
Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Bug target/92469] ICE: output_operand: invalid use of register
 'frame' in 7/8/9/10
References: <bug-92469-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
 <bug-92469-4-kN3pfCaacY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2020 10:07:22 +0100
In-Reply-To: <bug-92469-4-kN3pfCaacY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (jakub at gcc
 dot gnu org's message of "Mon, 04 May 2020 09:12:01 +0000")
Message-ID: <mptsggeiwc5.fsf@arm.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NEUTRAL,
 TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
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: <http://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: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 May 2020 09:07:32 -0000

"jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Seems neither accessible_reg_set nor operand_reg_set can exclude frame, because
> the latter results in general_operand predicate failing for it and the former
> results into the latter not being enabled either.
> So, if we wanted to reject this right away, we'd have to add another hard reg
> set (e.g. containing gcc internal artifical regs that shouldn't appear in asm
> register specification), or a target hook that would reject such registers that
> varasm.c would call.

Agree a hard reg set would be good.  We should be able to fill in
the easy cases automatically, e.g. FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM when it's
!= HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM.  But some cases would still need
target help.