public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/26087] [4.2 Regression] ICE in df_find_use
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 13:57:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060203135753.15959.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-26087-6528@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #2 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-02-03 13:57 -------
The code looks like

(insn 86 85 77 2 (set (reg:CC 127)
        (compare:CC (reg/v:SI 125 [ ei1 ])
            (const_int 0 [0x0]))) -1 (nil)
    (nil))

(note 77 86 18 2 NOTE_INSN_LOOP_BEG)
...
a lot of insns
...
(jump_insn 21 18 88 3 (set (pc)
        (if_then_else (ne (reg:CC 127)
                (const_int 0 [0x0]))
            (label_ref:SI 88)
            (pc))) 405 {*rs6000.md:13340} (nil)
    (expr_list:REG_BR_PROB (const_int 9900 [0x26ac])
        (nil)))

The exit is invariant and insn is outside of the loop. But,
get_condition will identify it as the source of the reg:CC 127
value, which causes the ice as we did not scan insns outside
of the loop for df information.

What get_condition does seems wrong to me -- it does not check cfg
at all, in particular it ignores the backedge of the loop.  I think
the proper fix is to stop get_condition at the start of a basic block
in case it has more than one predecessor.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26087


  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-02-03 13:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-02-03  3:44 [Bug rtl-optimization/26087] New: " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-02-03  3:44 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/26087] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-02-03  3:48 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-02-03 13:57 ` rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2006-02-03 14:14 ` rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-02-03 19:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-02-04 21:30 ` rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-02-05 14:58 ` rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-02-05 15:29 ` rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060203135753.15959.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).