Ping patch 1/2.
I think we can skip patch 2/2 since this was meanwhile fixed in
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-August/692272.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-August/692268.html
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 12:03:43PM +0200, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
> It looks like we didn't have a test so far reaching this point which
> changed with the new hard register constraint tests. Bootstrap and
> regtest are still running on x86_64. If they succeed, ok for mainline?
>
> -- >8 --
>
> As noted by Sam in the PR, with checking enabled tests
> gcc.target/i386/asm-hard-reg-{1,2}.c fail with an ICE. If an error is
> detected in curr_insn_transform(), lra_asm_insn_error() is called and
> deletes the current insn. However, afterwards processing continues with
> the deleted insn and via lra_process_new_insns() we finally call recog()
> for NOTE_INSN_DELETED which ICEs in case of a checking build. Thus, in
> case of an error during curr_insn_transform() bail out and stop
> processing.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR rtl-optimization/121205
> * lra-constraints.cc (curr_insn_transform): Stop processing on
> error.
> ---
> gcc/lra-constraints.cc | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.cc b/gcc/lra-constraints.cc
> index 83f8fda3b52..dc3c224a097 100644
> --- a/gcc/lra-constraints.cc
> +++ b/gcc/lra-constraints.cc
> @@ -4929,7 +4929,10 @@ curr_insn_transform (bool check_only_p)
> if (asm_noperands (PATTERN (curr_insn)) >= 0
> && ++curr_id->asm_reloads_num >= FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER)
> /* Most probably there are no enough registers to satisfy asm insn: */
> - lra_asm_insn_error (curr_insn);
> + {
> + lra_asm_insn_error (curr_insn);
> + return change_p;
> + }
> }
> if (goal_alt_out_sp_reload_p)
> {
> --
> 2.49.0
>
