This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: egcs/gcc internal errors in the recent snapshot
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: egcs/gcc internal errors in the recent snapshot
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at upchuck dot cygnus dot com>
- Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 02:53:39 -0700
- cc: "Alexander L. Belikoff" <abel at bfr dot co dot il>, egcs-bugs at egcs dot cygnus dot com, egcs-patches at egcs dot cygnus dot com, tege at matematik dot su dot se
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <19990311133402.D30191@cygnus.com>you write:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 1999 at 12:18:47PM +0200, Alexander L. Belikoff wrote:
> > egcs_crash3.c:49: internal error--insn does not satisfy its constraints:
> > (insn 309 282 214 (set (reg:QI 36 $f4)
> > (reg:QI 3 $3)) 288 {movsi-1} (nil)
> > (nil))
>
> Ok, I finally tracked this down. This is a bit of ugliness that
> worked before because there was no int to fp register move insns.
Any thoughts on why we haven't seen this fail during a bootstrap before --
it's not like people haven't been using the alpha port.
> I considered making the change conditional on TARGET_CIX, but
> rejected it as not being Right. We'll see how much in the way of
> performance we lose on ev56, I guess.
Presumably TARGET_CIX is an ev6? I'm trying to wrap my brain around why
Tege couldn't bootstrap but other folks have been successful.
> Jeff, this is something that's been bitched about wrt egcs 1.1;
> I think it should go there as well.
I'll probably include it. I've certainly seen quite a few bug reports
that looked similar. Though for some reason I didn't remember any of them
being reported against egcs-1.1.
jeff