From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 8BEC2388DD16; Sat, 27 Aug 2022 13:43:20 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 8BEC2388DD16 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1661607800; bh=hw603pIXAkoQHiKbYl1ywuAdhsAmSxG2+USp9M9WKh0=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=PIyFXq8y965Sbl6e0hG00OvUEP1HIbr9ortosNpJMFh6+/UKg8rLCgm2Yks64fp7s 8aIg+nxMyHKj0+mtBdEaufM45zaBfs0RGTyOPiebZh/asS/L6Z26U/eX2SbFy+HhjT W3kkrWWn+2aKzNPpM2Y5PKD9AHBM/iktp25sRcJs= From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/106736] [13 Regression] ICE in gen_movxo, at config/rs6000/mma.md:333 Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 13:43:19 +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: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106736 --- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin --- (In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #5) > (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #4) > > Thanks for the comments! One patch guarding these types is attached, it= can > > fix the ICE. >=20 > That won't work, because that's what we used to do! :-) In PR96125, the > test case there is compiled with -mcpu=3Dpower8, but uses a pragma/target > attribute to compile a function with -mcpu=3Dpower10/-mmma. The problem = is > that built-in and target type initialization is only done once, so we can= 't > tell from the explicit options being used, whether there will be a functi= on > later that uses a pragma/target attribute, so we have to assume there will > be. >=20 aha, good point! Yeah, then the patch is wrong. > Therefore, we have to always initialize them as we do now, but somehow la= ter > catch any illegal usage. Ideas on how to do that welcome! :-) > ...and we actually do catch the illegal usage, but how we can fail > gracefully instead of an ICE is what we need to figure out. Maybe similar > to your PR103353, we just need the mov[xo]o patterns to succeed temporari= ly > so we can fail gracefully later? Good idea! Btw if changing the current unreachable to FAIL, it will expand = as multiple words without errors, but it's unexpected as we don't want the typ= es to be used like that. Maybe we can use an "error" for this kind of usage instead of the current unreachable, will have a further look.=