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 E1E04385780C; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:18:52 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E1E04385780C
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/105394] [12 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple
 failed with MVE during GIMPLE pass: veclower2
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:18:52 +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: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-105394-4-mM7T0SUBt1@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-105394-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-105394-4@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: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:18:53 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105394

--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We are calling tree_vec_extract with bitsize 32 but a QImode boolean type.

ICK.

(gdb) p debug_gimple_stmt (stmt)
_8 =3D VEC_COND_EXPR <_6, _7, { 3.0e+0, 3.0e+0, 3.0e+0, 3.0e+0 }>;
$15 =3D void
(gdb) p debug_tree (a)
 <ssa_name 0x7ffff6492318
    type <vector_type 0x7ffff66309d8
        type <boolean_type 0x7ffff6630930 public QI
            size <integer_cst 0x7ffff6526348 constant 8>
            unit-size <integer_cst 0x7ffff6526360 constant 1>
            align:8 warn_if_not_align:0 symtab:0 alias-set -1 canonical-type
0x7ffff6630930 precision:4 min <integer_cst 0x7ffff662e300 -8> max <integer=
_cst
0x7ffff662e348 7>>
        V4BI
        size <integer_cst 0x7ffff6526408 constant 16>
        unit-size <integer_cst 0x7ffff6526420 constant 2>
        align:16 warn_if_not_align:0 symtab:0 alias-set -1 canonical-type
0x7ffff66309d8 nunits:4>
    visited
    def_stmt _6 =3D _27;
    version:6>

so we have a non 1-precision BImode bool.  That's something we assume
doesn't happen (here).

I see V4BImode is 2 bytes in size, are there really 4 bits used for each
element?

The patch below assumes that and generates

  _40 =3D VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<unsigned short>(_6);
  _41 =3D _40 & 15;
  _42 =3D _41 !=3D 0 ? _30 : 3.0e+0;
  _43 =3D _40 & 240;
  _44 =3D _43 !=3D 0 ? _33 : 3.0e+0;
  _45 =3D _40 & 3840;
  _46 =3D _45 !=3D 0 ? _36 : 3.0e+0;
  _47 =3D _40 & 61440;
  _48 =3D _47 !=3D 0 ? _39 : 3.0e+0;
  _8 =3D {_42, _44, _46, _48};

for the unsupported VEC_COND_EXPR.  The approach won't work for variable-le=
ngth
vectors since we cannot pun that to an integer type (precision is always
constant).  So eventually using an adjusted BIT_FIELD_REF for the
vector BImode case is better - as said the current code simply assumes
a classical mask.

I suppose for SVE we never run into unsupported conds?=