Sorry for the noise, I've remember I had a similar issue in the past. Thanks, Claudiu
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Claudiu Zissulescu <claudiu.zissule...@synopsys.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Out of the expand I get the following pattern: > > (set (reg:SI 203) > (subreg:SI (mem/c:DI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 147 virtual-stack-vars) > (const_int -320 [0xfffffffffffffec0])) [4 buf1.state+0 S8 > A32]) 4)) > > which it looks too complex to be handled by the VREGS pass. I.e., in the > instantiate_virtual_regs_in_insn() function, it seems we handle only subreg > (reg ...). > As a consequence, the virtual-stack-vars reg is not instantiated leading to a > compiler internal error later on. > > Now, is the above pattern expected out of expand? Is the VREGS expected to > handle this type of pattern? > > Many thanks, > Claudiu
