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 720483858C27; Wed,  6 Apr 2022 10:43:12 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 720483858C27
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/105165] ICE in
 gimple_redirect_edge_and_branch, at tree-cfg.cc:6136
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 10:43:12 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth 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: bug_status assigned_to cc
Message-ID: <bug-105165-4-c2Ih7qgDUm@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-105165-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-105165-4@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: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 10:43:12 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105165

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEW
           Assignee|rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org         |unassigned at gcc d=
ot gnu.org
                 CC|                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It's complex lowering not being able to deal with the _Complex definition in
the
asm goto.  Why do we allow asm gotos to have outputs?

__complex__ unsigned int foo (__complex__ unsigned int a1, __complex__ unsi=
gned
int a2)
{
  __complex__ unsigned int x;
  __complex__ unsigned int _1;
  __complex__ unsigned int _2;
  __complex__ unsigned int _9;

  <bb 2> [local count: 1073741824]:
  __asm__ goto("" : "=3Dr" x_4 :  :  : "lab" lab);

  <bb 3> [local count: 536870913]:
  a0 =3D x_4;

  <bb 4> [local count: 1073741824]:
lab:
  _1 =3D x_4 + a1_7(D);
  _2 =3D _1 + a2_8(D);
  _9 =3D _2 + __complex__ (1, 0);
  return _9;

complex lowering isn't prepared for this.  The only thing it could do is
emit a copy on each edge and adjust SSA form accordingly but in the end
that would be expensive.  That said, the "proper" lowering would possibly
rewrite the asm in-place to sth like

  asm goto ("" : "=3DrR" (x$real), "=3DrR" (x$imag) : : : lab);


Again - why are outputs allowed for asm goto?  Can we at least disallow
complex typed outputs?=