On 02/01/2017 11:38 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 11:34:48AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: >>> Presumably the issue with print_operand_address is that there are paths >>> where s390_decompose_address can return without initializing AD/OUT. But >>> AFAICT those are invalid addresses that presumably shouldn't be showing up >>> in print_operand_address. >>> >>> Can you add an assert in print_operand_address to ensure decomposition >>> never returns false? > > Can't it happen e.g. with inline asm and "X" constraint? > output_operand_lossage then would emit an error rather than ICE for > something that is a user code bug, not internal compiler error.
Ok, thus said I'll commit the original version. Is it fine? M. > >> >> Like done in v2 of the patch? >> >> If so, I'll commit that. > > Jakub >
