https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88850
--- Comment #5 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> --- So yeah it seems that there are three issues here: 1) We should probably have an r -> r alternative for *neon_mov. 2) The costs are now flipped from what they were before, for some reason the VFP regs are now way more expensive. 3) reload shouldn't have ICEd since it says r113: preferred GENERAL_REGS, alternative ALL_REGS, allocno ALL_REGS so it hasn't excluded ALL_REGS as an alternative, which should have either a) used the VPF register again or b) spilled the register since we have a m -> r and r -> m pattern.
