From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 21F023858D35; Thu,  9 Dec 2021 01:49:03 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 21F023858D35
From: "guihaoc at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/100736] ICE: unrecognizable insn
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 01:49:02 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: guihaoc at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-100736-4-NG5rwAN78A@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-100736-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-100736-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 01:49:03 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100736

--- Comment #4 from HaoChen Gui <guihaoc at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes, there is a question. With my patch, the test case generates following
assembly. Seems they have the same latency (cror vs. crnot). I wonder why we
need reverse the CR bit comparison when finite-math-only is set. Thanks.

without finite-math-only
        bcdsub. %v2,%v2,%v3,0
        cror 26,25,26
        mfcr %r3,2
        rlwinm %r3,%r3,27,1

with finite-math-only
        bcdsub. %v2,%v2,%v3,0
        crnot 26,24
        mfcr %r3,2
        rlwinm %r3,%r3,27,1=