Hi Segher, Sorry for the late reply...
Good to know that. I also observed some problems how we define register classes for ARC. Please allow me to clean it a bit, and then come back to you with this problem, if it is still there. Thank you, Claudiu On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 6:00 PM Segher Boessenkool <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > Hi Claudiu, > > On Tue, Sep 04, 2018 at 11:11:44AM +0200, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote: > > I am trying to get LRA fully working for ARC, but I've got an issue. > > Whenever, LRA analyses an instruction having (clobber > > (match_scratch:SI 3 "=X, ...)) in its pattern I hit the assert in > > lra-constraints.c:4101, and it seems it has to do with the scratch's > > 'X' constraint. > > Do I miss something? Is there any limitation between LRA and scratch > > operands having in their alternative 'X' constraint? > > There are other targets with =X in an alternative for a clobber match_scratch, > like rs6000, and that does work fine with LRA. It doesn't hit that assert, > anyway ;-) > > Do you have some debug output to show what is going on here? > > > Segher
