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 9084F3858406; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 06:36:19 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9084F3858406
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/103623] [12 Regression] error: unable to generate
 reloads (ICE in curr_insn_transform, at lra-constraints.c:4132), or error:
 insn does not satisfy its constraints (ICE in extract_constrain_insn_cached,
 at recog.c:2682)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 06:36:19 +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-invalid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cf_reconfirmed_on
Message-ID: <bug-103623-4-4DR1BbCjRg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-103623-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-103623-4@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: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 06:36:19 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D103623

Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|2021-12-10 00:00:00         |2021-12-27

--- Comment #21 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> 1=EF=BC=89 (TARGET_LONG_DOUBLE_128 && TARGET_HARD_FLOAT && !TARGET_IEEEQU=
AD)
>=20
> this return false on your side, which is the flag used for previous bif
> support.
> Could you check all the values?
>=20
> 2) FLOAT128_2REG_P (TFmode)
>=20
> this return true on your side, and as the below defintion,
>=20
> #define FLOAT128_2REG_P(MODE)						\
>   (FLOAT128_IBM_P (MODE)						\
>    || ((MODE) =3D=3D TDmode)						\
>    || (!TARGET_FLOAT128_TYPE && FLOAT128_IEEE_P (MODE)))
>=20
> #define FLOAT128_IBM_P(MODE)						\
>   ((!TARGET_IEEEQUAD && TARGET_LONG_DOUBLE_128				\
>     && ((MODE) =3D=3D TFmode || (MODE) =3D=3D TCmode))				\
>    || (TARGET_HARD_FLOAT && ((MODE) =3D=3D IFmode || (MODE) =3D=3D ICmode=
)))
>=20
> Could you check which condition arm makes FLOAT128_2REG_P true on your si=
de?

After typing these checks, I just tried and realized that my local cross-bu=
ild
on ppc64le can reproduce this if I specify -mlong-double-128. So Arseny's l=
ocal
env make this option default as -mlong-double-128 while mine uses
-mlong-double-64.  Thanks Arseny! :)

So confirmed.=