Hi Thomas,
On Tue, 2025-04-15 00:22:26 +0200, Thomas Schwinge <tschwi...@baylibre.com>
wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/except.cc b/gcc/except.cc
> index d5eb9274a62..205811c6567 100644
> --- a/gcc/except.cc
> +++ b/gcc/except.cc
> @@ -970,12 +970,26 @@ expand_dw2_landing_pad_for_region (eh_region region)
> { /* Nothing */ }
>
> if (region->exc_ptr_reg)
> - emit_move_insn (region->exc_ptr_reg,
> - gen_rtx_REG (ptr_mode, EH_RETURN_DATA_REGNO (0)));
> + {
> + rtx exc_ptr_reg;
> + if (EH_RETURN_DATA_REGNO (0) != INVALID_REGNUM)
This ...
> + exc_ptr_reg = gen_rtx_REG (ptr_mode, EH_RETURN_DATA_REGNO (0));
> + else
> + /* The target must be doing something special. Submit a dummy. */
> + exc_ptr_reg = constm1_rtx;
> + emit_move_insn (region->exc_ptr_reg, exc_ptr_reg);
> + }
> if (region->filter_reg)
> - emit_move_insn (region->filter_reg,
> - gen_rtx_REG (targetm.eh_return_filter_mode (),
> - EH_RETURN_DATA_REGNO (1)));
> + {
> + rtx filter_reg;
> + if (EH_RETURN_DATA_REGNO (1) != INVALID_REGNUM)
...and this result in an signed <-> unsigned warning for targets
that implement EH_RETURN_DATA_REGNO as a function (which usually
returns just int), affecting at least m32c and mmix.
Thanks,
Jan-Benedict
--
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
