On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 01:45:19PM +0000, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Bootstrapped and tested on arm, x86, aarch64.
> This ICE doesn't happen with 4.9 and 4.8 so it's only a regression for GCC
> 5.
> The currently ICE'ins testcase passes now, so no new testcase is added.
Not an expert on this, but it looks wrong to me.
emit_move_insn is used a few lines above, but only for the general_operand
case, so it seems it was very much intentional that way. I bet
emit_move_insn isn't prepared to handle arbitrary RTL expressions, so the
general_operand check makes sense for it.
As process_insert_insn supposed can't fail, perhaps something earlier should
have figured out it would be invalid?
Jakub
