CLEAR_REGNO_REG_SET (bb->global_live_at_start,
HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM);
- /* Come here (with failure set nonzero) if we can't get enough spill regs
- and we decide not to abort about it. */
+ /* Come here (with failure set nonzero) if we can't get enough spill
+ regs. */
failed:
CLEAR_REG_SET (&spilled_pseudos);
if (size > STACK_CHECK_MAX_FRAME_SIZE)
{
- warning ("frame size too large for reliable stack checking");
+ warning (0, "frame size too large for reliable stack checking");
if (! verbose_warned)
{
- warning ("try reducing the number of local variables");
+ warning (0, "try reducing the number of local variables");
verbose_warned = 1;
}
}
unsigned int nr;
/* note_stores does give us subregs of hard regs,
- subreg_regno_offset will abort if it is not a hard reg. */
+ subreg_regno_offset requires a hard reg. */
while (GET_CODE (x) == SUBREG)
{
/* We ignore the subreg offset when calculating the regno,
}
/* Return nonzero if the rtx X is invariant over the current function. */
-/* ??? Actually, the places where we use this expect exactly what
- * is tested here, and not everything that is function invariant. In
- * particular, the frame pointer and arg pointer are special cased;
- * pic_offset_table_rtx is not, and this will cause aborts when we
- * go to spill these things to memory. */
+/* ??? Actually, the places where we use this expect exactly what is
+ tested here, and not everything that is function invariant. In
+ particular, the frame pointer and arg pointer are special cased;
+ pic_offset_table_rtx is not, and we must not spill these things to
+ memory. */
static int
function_invariant_p (rtx x)
|| rld[j].when_needed == RELOAD_FOR_INPADDR_ADDRESS)
? RELOAD_FOR_OTHER_ADDRESS : RELOAD_OTHER);
- /* Check to see if we accidentally converted two reloads
- that use the same reload register with different inputs
- to the same type. If so, the resulting code won't work,
- so abort. */
+ /* Check to see if we accidentally converted two
+ reloads that use the same reload register with
+ different inputs to the same type. If so, the
+ resulting code won't work. */
if (rld[j].reg_rtx)
for (k = 0; k < j; k++)
gcc_assert (rld[k].in == 0 || rld[k].reg_rtx == 0