https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92796
--- Comment #10 from Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #7) > > > I'm guessing this was never a problem before I added the code to not add > conflicts for copies. Before then, any two pseudos/registers that were live > simultaneously were made to conflict, which would have hid this bug. I believe this bug existed before. For example, the initial assignment (and some LRA transformations) does not guarantee correctness of already made assignments. Therefore there is flag lra_risky_transformations_p (I am going to change this name) to deal with such situations. Simply the current situation was not considered before. I have a patch and after some testing I'll commit it (probably tomorrow).
