public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/106101] [12/13 Regression] ICE in reg_bitfield_target_p since r12-4428-g147ed0184f403b Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 06:46:50 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-106101-4-pPRoroSsx3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-106101-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106101 --- Comment #18 from Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #17) ... > Yes, but that says the high 48 bits of the hardware reg are untouched, which > is not true (only the high 16 of the low 32 are guaranteed unmodified). Right, if the original register mode does not match the mode of the full hardreg, we continue to need that mode as the upper bound. So with the subreg folding in reload we appear to loose information we need to interpret the STRICT_LOW_PART correctly. I'm testing the following patch in combination with my other fix now: diff --git a/gcc/lra-spills.cc b/gcc/lra-spills.cc index 4ddbe477d92..9c125a9ce38 100644 --- a/gcc/lra-spills.cc +++ b/gcc/lra-spills.cc @@ -855,6 +855,7 @@ lra_final_code_change (void) for (i = id->insn_static_data->n_operands - 1; i >= 0; i--) if ((DEBUG_INSN_P (insn) || ! static_id->operand[i].is_operator) + && ! static_id->operand[i].strict_low && alter_subregs (id->operand_loc[i], ! DEBUG_INSN_P (insn))) { lra_update_dup (id, i); With that change the SUBREG folding from comment #11 happens later in final (cleanup_subreg_operands). I'm not sure whether we would have to prevent it there as well?!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-24 6:46 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-06-27 9:22 [Bug rtl-optimization/106101] New: [12/13 Regression] ICE in reg_bitfield_target_p rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-27 9:22 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/106101] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-27 9:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-27 9:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-27 15:10 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-28 6:57 ` [Bug target/106101] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-28 15:03 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-28 16:58 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-29 9:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-29 15:48 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-08 13:56 ` [Bug target/106101] [12/13 Regression] ICE in reg_bitfield_target_p since r12-4428-g147ed0184f403b marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-14 10:02 ` krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-19 11:53 ` krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-08-24 6:46 ` krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-08-24 11:57 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-08-25 12:40 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-08-25 13:02 ` krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-08-25 13:55 ` krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-08-25 15:03 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-17 15:25 ` [Bug target/106101] [12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-17 15:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-23 7:58 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-03-01 13:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-10-10 14:29 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-10-10 17:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-10-10 17:39 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-10-11 6:46 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.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=bug-106101-4-pPRoroSsx3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --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: linkBe 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).