https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110908
Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2023-08-07
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Severity|normal |enhancement
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Why would you ever want to fix x30? Because of the way it is used by the
architecture, there's no possible value in doing so. The compiler may insert
instructions that must clobber this value at any point in the program (to
handle libfuncs, for example), so it would be unsafe to store any useful value
in it.
I think it would be far more useful to make the compiler reject this option
than to give the appearance that it is possible, when frankly, it isn't.
Although it isn't technically, an ICE on invalid code, it's about as close to
that as you can get.
