Hi! Apparently when fixing these issues earlier I've missed one spot with gcc_unreachable () dependent on the value that could be provided by user in bogus inline asm.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? 2017-02-28 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> PR target/79729 * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_print_operand) <case 'R'>: Replace gcc_unreachable with output_operand_lossage. * gcc.target/i386/pr79729.c: New test. --- gcc/config/i386/i386.c.jj 2017-02-28 07:49:33.000000000 +0100 +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.c 2017-02-28 07:56:38.536106025 +0100 @@ -18228,7 +18228,8 @@ ix86_print_operand (FILE *file, rtx x, i fputs ("{rz-sae}", file); break; default: - gcc_unreachable (); + output_operand_lossage ("operand is not a specific integer, " + "invalid operand code 'R'"); } if (ASSEMBLER_DIALECT == ASM_ATT) --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr79729.c.jj 2017-02-28 07:58:11.168862088 +0100 +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr79729.c 2017-02-28 07:58:31.401590388 +0100 @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +/* PR target/79729 */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +void +foo (int x) +{ + __asm__ volatile ("# %R0" : : "n" (129)); /* { dg-error "invalid operand code" } */ +} Jakub