On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 07:46:07PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > Anyhow - my question still stands - what's the fallback for the callers > that do not check for failure? How are we sure we're not running into > these when relaxing the requirement that a MODE_CC prepare_cmp_insn > must not fail?
This will work the same as with any other define_expand? If the caller of gen_blablabla does not check for failure, you end up with a NULL_RTX in the instruction stream, which will ICE sooner or later. Not pretty, sure, but at least it is a reliable ICE :-) Segher
