internal compiler error: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093

internal compiler error: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093

[daniel tian]

I have ported gcc4.0.2  to 32bit RISC chip. But internal compiler
error happened: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093 . I
tracked the code with insight.  error occurred in "CASE REG", when the
register number is larger than FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER. Does this mean
the reload register allocation failed?  What I know is that there is
no pseudo register used after reload completed (Is this right?).

Can anyone give me some advice?

Any suggestion is appreciated.
Thank you very much.


                                                 Daniel.Tian

Re: internal compiler error: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093

[Dave Korn]

daniel tian wrote:
> I have ported gcc4.0.2  to 32bit RISC chip. But internal compiler
> error happened: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093 . I
> tracked the code with insight.  error occurred in "CASE REG", when the
> register number is larger than FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER. Does this mean
> the reload register allocation failed?  What I know is that there is
> no pseudo register used after reload completed (Is this right?).

  Yes, this is correct.

> Can anyone give me some advice?

  It is most likely one of the expanders or other patterns in your MD file is
unconditionally calling a function such as force_reg() without checking the
reload_completed / reload_in_progress flags.  If this pattern gets invoked
post-reload, that will allocate a pseudo and then fail later.

    cheers,
      DaveK

Re: internal compiler error: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093

[daniel tian]

Thank you for your advice.

Yes. I checked the MD file and relative machine.h/.c, there are some
places which call the ''force_reg' unconditionally. I modified the it
in "movm" insn pattern, the error still exists. And I also check the
mips/arm, they also call 'force_reg' unconditional in some places.

Anything I missed?

2009/5/13 Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>:
> daniel tian wrote:
>> I have ported gcc4.0.2  to 32bit RISC chip. But internal compiler
>> error happened: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093 . I
>> tracked the code with insight.  error occurred in "CASE REG", when the
>> register number is larger than FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER. Does this mean
>> the reload register allocation failed?  What I know is that there is
>> no pseudo register used after reload completed (Is this right?).
>
>  Yes, this is correct.
>
>> Can anyone give me some advice?
>
>  It is most likely one of the expanders or other patterns in your MD file is
> unconditionally calling a function such as force_reg() without checking the
> reload_completed / reload_in_progress flags.  If this pattern gets invoked
> post-reload, that will allocate a pseudo and then fail later.
>
>    cheers,
>      DaveK
>
>
>

Re: internal compiler error: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093

[Jean Christophe Beyler]

Except if I'm mistaken, force_reg will generally call gen_reg_rtx
which does check for those two flags internally (via
can_create_pseudo_p). So you should not have that error in this case.

I suggest you use a debug_rtx on the operand that's a problem, and
first check if gen_reg_rtx is used to create it. If that's the case,
you can use gdb to trace when it's called, get a backtrace and work
from there.

Jc

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:54 PM, daniel tian <daniel.xntian@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for your advice.
>
> Yes. I checked the MD file and relative machine.h/.c, there are some
> places which call the ''force_reg' unconditionally. I modified the it
> in "movm" insn pattern, the error still exists. And I also check the
> mips/arm, they also call 'force_reg' unconditional in some places.
>
> Anything I missed?
>
> 2009/5/13 Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>:
>> daniel tian wrote:
>>> I have ported gcc4.0.2  to 32bit RISC chip. But internal compiler
>>> error happened: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1093 . I
>>> tracked the code with insight.  error occurred in "CASE REG", when the
>>> register number is larger than FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER. Does this mean
>>> the reload register allocation failed?  What I know is that there is
>>> no pseudo register used after reload completed (Is this right?).
>>
>>  Yes, this is correct.
>>
>>> Can anyone give me some advice?
>>
>>  It is most likely one of the expanders or other patterns in your MD file is
>> unconditionally calling a function such as force_reg() without checking the
>> reload_completed / reload_in_progress flags.  If this pattern gets invoked
>> post-reload, that will allocate a pseudo and then fail later.
>>
>>    cheers,
>>      DaveK
>>
>>
>>
>