From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 494DD3858D33; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 14:22:21 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 494DD3858D33 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1708352541; bh=NsmqgJ7QKjK6n+eujgv/mt/M/U4q2Tkr7Kbz+N4jtWA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=fcOgfy/M00CQsJM//26//ZEsNMSLreOzgsgYAbOto9qR7/FADmPKWWtWPR9I35bbq zxewWVf3YSErUMOKIrdaYLP52IRVFjDQnm4RT2SnTAQdCtYgKlxe42o4m1BdRCmRxx xhM1yyUwU2hfpZT7SyO/W5JmrxLX/H4WYHjnnPvg= From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/113988] during GIMPLE pass: bitintlower: internal compiler error: in lower_stmt, at gimple-lower-bitint.cc:5470 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 14:22:20 +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: rguenth 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: --- 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=3D113988 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- I wonder if we should stop claiming those modes are "supported". Maybe ins= tead of making them integer modes they should be OPAQUE_MODE or vector (integer) modes in the first place? There's bitwise_mode_for_mode but that will I think never do anything unless we have MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE < OImode? It will also never make vector modes from integer modes ...=