[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #11 from Michael Meissner --- Author: meissner Date: Thu Feb 4 21:05:14 2016 New Revision: 233147 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233147=gcc=rev Log: [gcc] 2016-02-04 Michael Meissner

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool --- Does not fail on gcc110 (P7 BE).

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool --- ... but fails with -mcpu=power8.

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #3) > ... but fails with -mcpu=power8. Yeah. I forgot to mention that I configure gcc with --with-cpu=power8.

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #3) > ... but fails with -mcpu=power8. Yeah. I forgot to mention that I configure gcc with --with-cpu=power8.

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool --- Choosing alt 3 in insn 9: (0) ws (1) j {*movtf_64bit_dm} Creating newreg=229 from oldreg=171, assigning class VSX_REGS to r229 9: r229:TF=0.0 REG_EQUAL 0.0 Inserting insn

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #8 from Vladimir Makarov --- (In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #7) > The error is LRA requires that every register that a constraint targets be a > valid register for the mode. In this case, the 3 move insns that target >

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #10 from Michael Meissner --- I agree it is better to use the right constraints, but it can be easy to overlook things, especially since reload didn't raise an error. Particularly when you are using the various iterators and

[Bug target/69667] [6 Regression] ppc64le -mlra: ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69667 --- Comment #9 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 37582 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37582=edit Proposed patch to fix the problem