From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 507353858D3C; Mon, 24 Apr 2023 09:50:09 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 507353858D3C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1682329809; bh=B09c8dtMQfBfZ7QvYKyNH8L2bkdsEr00Qk7PtAIwiRk=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=fX/TlVOpUm5Xny6rDVrBdKTGsxr4DByYFmwqosgRKemXmqBfpOc/D+H2M/IVioOQB 5uFqgdje6zqXkxICxmJJ9i/RXJph55Jjc5Rr1lNSqcX7Mk5//PJJ7E5HQ1bTdyK1qP VbQNiGTTgOSPDyIXJaV6S+6wB4Pvc4hF/pG8SG+E= From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/109566] [13/14 Regression] powerpc: unrecognizable insn for -mcpu=e6500, -mcpu=power3, ..., -mcpu=power10 Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 09:50:08 +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: build, ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub 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: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed bug_status cc 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=3D109566 Jakub Jelinek changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last reconfirmed| |2023-04-24 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC| |yinyuefengyi at gmail dot = com --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Ah, it ICEs on powerpc64-linux too, with -m32 -O2 -mpowerpc64 -mcpu=3Dpower= 3 (or 10 etc.), -mpowerpc64 is what matters. In *.postreload we have (jump_insn 10 7 32 2 (parallel [ (set (pc) (if_then_else (eq (and:DI (reg:DI 9 9 [121]) (const_int 2146435072 [0x7ff00000])) (const_int 0 [0])) (label_ref:SI 40) (pc))) (clobber (reg:DI 9 9 [125])) (clobber (reg:CC 100 0)) ]) "pr109566-3.c":6:6 229 {*branch_anddi3_dot} (int_list:REG_BR_PROB 708669604 (nil)) The define_insn_and_split has been introduced already in GCC 12 in PR102239 r12-6433 and I'd say it is just wrong, the FAIL part doesn't belong there, that is an ICE if for a define_insn_and_split with "#" the splitter part FAILs. The condition on the instruction or predicates/constraints should make sure= it is splittable.=