https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60102
--- Comment #9 from Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com> --- I've been looking at this a little bit more. DWARF_FRAME_REGNUM is specifically documented to take a hard register number as its operand, so the assertion in dwf_regno is at least consistent with that. The one in dbx_reg_number is more dubious, since neither LEAF_REG_REMAP or DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER are documented to require a hard register number. So: either the powerpc backend is broken to be using a pseudo in this context, or else the documentation for DWARF_FRAME_REGNUM should be changed to permit this and the assertions (as necessary) moved into the target-specific implementations of these macros.
