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 93AC33858407; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:07:50 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 93AC33858407
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1706519270;
	bh=o8iuo/avoL88VXHgrIlMusOUARdEv7yxinHiCOBpuHc=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=obj9QHWsnyiuKGw9PBhm9X7DOwAJkcYa2lEDqf+zzHlShWJR4WFT71pECl8b3UMiu
	 iaCFumqwP5laud9BQRziF2Lo4doktnwiXJg3vzHvZZPx7uGLcCSB3BvoT5sij39Qap
	 MJe7fOAc1BCsm+1irLLtYR2FrvFyom/tKK6yIlac=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/113622] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE with
 vectors in named registers
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:07:50 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, testsuite-fail
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113622-4-YAJVCrLZRt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113622-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113622-4@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=3D113622

--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #12)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> > I think it is most important we don't ICE and generate correct code.  I
> > doubt this is used too much in real-world code, otherwise it would have=
 been
> > reported years ago, so how efficient it will be is less important.
>=20
> Hmm, but for another test case (LoongArch):
>=20
> typedef double __attribute__ ((vector_size (32))) vec;
> register vec a asm("f25"), b asm("f26"), c asm("f27");
>=20
> void
> test (void)
> {
>   for (int i =3D 0; i < 4; i++)
>     c[i] =3D __builtin_isless (a[i], b[i]) ? 0.1 : 0.2;
> }
>=20
> I'll have to write a loop (because __builtin_isless does not work on
> vectors).  Or is there a vector built-in I'm missing?

Why are you doing that?
Normally tests would do
vec
test (vec a, vec b)
{
  vec c =3D {};
  for (int i =3D 0; i < 4; i++)
    c[i] =3D __builtin_isless (a[i], b[i]) ? 0.1 : 0.2;
  return c;
}
or something similar.=