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 86CEC3858C50; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 11:49:50 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 86CEC3858C50
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1694519390;
	bh=JN2X4zQ58Jg0z7z8i6gSyfXRvbQNGNPyVPuxpU9Phi8=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=K9JJLqwGBvoWjC7RT5BEX+WqpY5xN9AuMQCX13ze5LVLdq08SLEkFowXC11SK97pJ
	 PARrRwZYW/7bomZE4shpTrM0eyB3SjbM9H0Vx7E4vQSveb5AFyT6xw32IM/EsYAftl
	 sxDP+lsTUf9DjQ2osfHLhHnzs1FYdi9uKitxn4ro=
From: "juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/111337] ICE in gimple-isel.cc for RISC-V port
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 11:49:50 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-111337-4-LaWIV37cH3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111337-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111337-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111337

--- Comment #3 from JuzheZhong <juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
>   vect_patt_67.34_168 =3D VEC_COND_EXPR <mask__5.33_165, { 1, ... }, { 0,=
 ...
> }>;
>   vect_patt_68.35_169 =3D (vector([4,4]) int) vect_patt_67.34_168;
>=20
> ->
>=20
>   vect_patt_68.35_169 =3D VEC_COND_EXPR <mask__5.33_165, { 1, ... }, { 0,=
 ...
> }>;
>=20
> this one looks odd - it's probably
>=20
> /* Sink unary conversions to branches, but only if we do fold both=20
>    and the target's truth type is the same as we already have.  */
> (simplify
>  (convert (vec_cond:s @0 @1 @2))
>  (if (VECTOR_TYPE_P (type)=20
>       && types_match (TREE_TYPE (@0), truth_type_for (type)))
>   (vec_cond @0 (convert! @1) (convert! @2))))=20
>=20
> the problem is that this happily produces a vec_cond we might not be able
> to expand - having the same truth type for the data type isn't enough
> if there's no optab with a matching data mode.  Same for the view_convert
> case.
>=20
> It's a bit convoluted to ask for target support here, can you double-check
> it isn't possible to add native riscv expanders for the missing case?

You mean support(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
>   vect_patt_67.34_168 =3D VEC_COND_EXPR <mask__5.33_165, { 1, ... }, { 0,=
 ...
> }>;
>   vect_patt_68.35_169 =3D (vector([4,4]) int) vect_patt_67.34_168;
>=20
> ->
>=20
>   vect_patt_68.35_169 =3D VEC_COND_EXPR <mask__5.33_165, { 1, ... }, { 0,=
 ...
> }>;
>=20
> this one looks odd - it's probably
>=20
> /* Sink unary conversions to branches, but only if we do fold both=20
>    and the target's truth type is the same as we already have.  */
> (simplify
>  (convert (vec_cond:s @0 @1 @2))
>  (if (VECTOR_TYPE_P (type)=20
>       && types_match (TREE_TYPE (@0), truth_type_for (type)))
>   (vec_cond @0 (convert! @1) (convert! @2))))=20
>=20
> the problem is that this happily produces a vec_cond we might not be able
> to expand - having the same truth type for the data type isn't enough
> if there's no optab with a matching data mode.  Same for the view_convert
> case.
>=20
> It's a bit convoluted to ask for target support here, can you double-check
> it isn't possible to add native riscv expanders for the missing case?

You mean we should add "vcond" patterns back ?=