Thanks, now I have totally understand! I think it deserves a clearer prompt, but I do not have a better idea currently. So forget it, thanks!
在 2023年12月11日星期一，Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> 写道： > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 12:39 PM xndcn <xnd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Got it, thanks! It is really confusing >,< > > What about the first one? For case MEM_REF. > > The same - the LHS determines this is a store, if it is the > RHS is invalid as diagnosed (it needs to go through a > temporary). > > Richard. > > > > > 在 2023年12月11日星期一，Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> 写道： > >> > >> On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 4:00 PM xndcn <xnd...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi, I am a newbie in GCC, and I do not have access to git repo. > >> > > >> > I found some misleading error messages in verify_gimple_assign_single > function of tree-cfg.cc. It prompt error "invalid RHS for gimple memory > store: ", but it checks lhs in fact. > >> > >> it might be a bit confusing but it's correct. There is a store > >> because !is_gimple_reg (lhs) > >> and the only case !is_gimple_reg (rhs1) is correct is when this is an > aggregate > >> copy (!is_gimple_reg_type (TREE_TYPE (lhs))). Otherwise the _RHS_ > needs to be > >> a register. > >> > >> Richard. >
