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

Reply via email to