On 06/11/15 11:08, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > This one is a fix for something that could currently only affect c6x, but I > have code that exposes it on i386. > > When optionally gathering operand info in regrename, we can overflow the > array in certain situations. This can occur when we have a situation where a > value is constructed in multiple small registers and then accessed as a > larger one (CDImode in the testcase I have). In that case we enter the > "superset" path, which fails the involved chains, but the smaller pieces > still all get seen by record_operand_use, and there may be more of them than > MAX_REGS_PER_ADDRESS. > > The following fixes it. Bootstrapped and tested with -frename-registers > enabled at -O1 on x86_64-linux. Ok? > > > Bernd
This sounds like it will fix http://gcc.gnu.org/PR66785 ... Ramana
