Re: regrename creates invalid insn

2012-07-11 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 07/12/2012 12:10 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Bernd Schmidt > wrote: >> On 03/26/2012 06:03 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >>> Bernd Schmidt writes: >>> Does 4.7 still have the failure at all? >>> >>> Yes, see PR52573. >> >> Well, I still think having both RE

Re: regrename creates invalid insn

2012-07-11 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 03/26/2012 06:03 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> Bernd Schmidt writes: >> >>> Does 4.7 still have the failure at all? >> >> Yes, see PR52573. > > Well, I still think having both REG_DEAD and REG_UNUSED for the same reg > is bogus, but fixin

Re: regrename creates invalid insn

2012-07-11 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 03/26/2012 06:03 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Bernd Schmidt writes: > >> Does 4.7 still have the failure at all? > > Yes, see PR52573. Well, I still think having both REG_DEAD and REG_UNUSED for the same reg is bogus, but fixing that causes trouble in reg-stack. It seems the path of least res