This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Abort in redirect_edge_and_branch on vax at line 866
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- Cc: John David Anglin <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, rth at redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 07:42:39 -0700
- Subject: Re: Abort in redirect_edge_and_branch on vax at line 866
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
> > The above doesn't match the "blt" pattern so I presume that it hasn't
> > been re-recognized. "(set (pc) (pc))" would probably match the movsi
> > pattern because GENERAL_REGS is ALL_REGS. Are you suggesting this
> > needs to change?
> No, se my other email - what happent was that gcse did changed jump into
> noop-set (original blt instruction) and left it in the instruction stream
> not cleaning up afterwards.
gcse probably should have set INSN_CODE (blah) = -1; when it did this to
avoid confusion.
Yes, the instruction is left in the insn stream -- that's the whole point
behind running the jump optimizer afterwards -- to zap any nop jumps in the
stream.
jeff