From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8681 invoked by alias); 19 Dec 2002 16:06:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8664 invoked by uid 71); 19 Dec 2002 16:06:01 -0000 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021219160601.8663.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: middle-end/8808 Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01022.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR middle-end/8808; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: middle-end/8808 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:58:06 -0600 (CST) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:37:53 +0100 From: Jan Hubicka To: Janis Johnson Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, jh@suse.cz, rodrigc@attbi.com, bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu, rth@cygnus.com Subject: Re: patch that caused regression PR middle-end/8808 > The regression reported in PR middle-end/8808 showed up starting > with this patch: > > Tue Feb 13 13:31:33 CET 2001 Jan Hubicka > > * i386.c (print_reg): Use ANY_FP_REG instead of FP_REG > * i386.h (MASK_128BIT_LONG_DOUBLE): Renumber > (MASK_SSE2): New. > (MASK_MIX_SSE_I387): New. > (TARGET_SSE): SSE2 imply SSE. > (TARGET_SSE2, TARGET_MIX_SSE_I387): New. > (TARGET_SWITCHES): Add "sse2", "mix-sse-i387". > (enum reg_class): Add new classes. > (REG_CLASS_NAMES): Likewise. > (REG_CLASS_CONTENTS): Likewise. > (ANY_FP_REG_P, ANY_FP_REGNO_P, SSE_REG_P, SSE_FLOAT_MODE): New macros. > (REG_CLASS_FROM_LETTER): 'x' and 'y' is SSE_REGS only when SSE is > supported. Add 'Y' to be SSE_REGS when SSE2 is supported. > (CLASS_MAX_NREGS): Use new macros. > (REGISTER_MOVE_COST): Rewrite using SECONDARY_MEMORY_MAYBE_NEEDED. > * i386.md (pushsf, movsf): Support SSE. > (pushdf_nointeger, pushdf_integer, pushdf): Support SSE, update > splitters to use ANY_FP_REGNO_P. > (movdf_nointeger, movdf_integer): Likewise. > > Here's a small test case that causes the compiler to ICE when compiled > on i686-linux: > > ------------------- > void f(unsigned long long int); > > void g () { > register unsigned long long int i asm ("mm0"); > f(i); > } > ------------------- Is this expected to work at all? > > Output from the compiler (current mainline): > > 8808.c: In function `g': > 8808.c:6: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints: > (insn 18 23 28 (nil) (set (mem:DI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 6 ebp) > (const_int -8 [0xfffffff8])) [0 S8 A8]) > (reg/v:DI 29 rmm0)) 59 {*movdi_2} (nil) > (nil)) > 8808.c:6: internal compiler error: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.c:2092 > Please submit a full bug report, > with preprocessed source if appropriate. > See for instructions. > > The test compiles with -march=pentium4; perhaps the compiler should > validate asm instructions against the target architecture and give > a meaningful error message in this case. Yes, however I am not at all sure how this can be done. Fixed register, for instance can be used in the asm("xxx") in rare situations, so I really don't see how one can validate such things. Honza > > I'll add this information to the PR. > > Janis