Hi,

here is the patch that restore the assertion and swap its arguments as
discussed in the PR.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65729

Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64, cross built and regtested on
i686, aarch64, arm and armeb. Is it ok for trunk (maybe after 5.1 is
released) ?

Thanks,
Yvan

gcc/
2015-04-13  Yvan Roux  <yvan.roux@linaro.org>

    PR target/65729
    * lra-constraints.c (prohibited_class_reg_set_mode_p): Restore and fix
    the assertion.

gcc/testsuite/
2015-04-13  Yvan Roux  <yvan.roux@st.com>

    PR target/65729
    * gcc.target/arm/pr65729.c: New test.

On 10 April 2015 at 18:39, Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com> wrote:
> I've committed the following patch for
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65729
>
>  The assert is definitely wrong.  We will work for the right one for
> GCC-5.1.
>
> Committed as rev. 221975.
>
> 2015-04-10  Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com>
>
>         PR target/65729
>         * lra-constraints.c (prohibited_class_reg_set_mode_p): Comment the
>         assert.
>
> Index: lra-constraints.c
> ===================================================================
> --- lra-constraints.c   (revision 221949)
> +++ lra-constraints.c   (working copy)
> @@ -1656,7 +1656,8 @@
>  {
> HARD_REG_SET temp;
>
> -  lra_assert (hard_reg_set_subset_p (set, reg_class_contents[rclass]));
> +  // ??? Is this assert right
> +  // lra_assert (hard_reg_set_subset_p (set, reg_class_contents[rclass]));
> COPY_HARD_REG_SET (temp, set);
> AND_COMPL_HARD_REG_SET (temp, lra_no_alloc_regs);
>    return (hard_reg_set_subset_p
>