This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug rtl-optimization/55055] [4.8 regression] RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1123
- From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:17:26 +0000
- Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/55055] [4.8 regression] RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1123
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-55055-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55055
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |ra
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2012-10-24
CC| |vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2012-10-24 15:17:26 UTC ---
There should be no subregs in peephole2 pass.
In .203r.ira, we have:
(insn 153 156 169 9 (set (reg:SI 154 [ D.1790 ])
(plus:SI (subreg:SI (reg:DI 87 [ a.0 ]) 0)
(const_int -1 [0xffffffffffffffff]))) 240 {*leasi}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 87 [ a.0 ])
(nil)))
and in .204r.reload, we still have:
(insn 153 156 169 9 (set (reg:SI 37 r8 [orig:154 D.1790 ] [154])
(plus:SI (subreg:SI (reg:DI 37 r8 [orig:87 a.0 ] [87]) 0)
(const_int -1 [0xffffffffffffffff]))) 240 {*leasi}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 37 r8 [orig:87 a.0 ] [87])
(nil)))
I will take an uneducated guess that this is due to new LRA.
Adding CC.