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 7F7473858CD1; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:43:07 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7F7473858CD1
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1708587787;
	bh=Zr2wkld2Y50F4bY5XpQ5axr+Ek7uE+L0Fo7ZIDey3Io=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=UbLlWCwswiDL8xJGCZmwU5jJDTBbiWlcMDJHKOo09X2HNFhPnke3MTFXOPYbPEXKz
	 pgnEnh9cjUtiivtpebVSx73XeNx6y0czVR8w3YxWA1tLDPJBo/9Rpx1hRqbBZgYMu+
	 OUPCiht3V8ER6wzfP2JyK1gpf8JJOAdC7vJTPkJg=
From: "pan2.li at intel dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/114027] [14] RISC-V vector: miscompile at -O3
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:43:07 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pan2.li at intel dot com
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-114027-4-LzSDJQDgDq@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114027-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114027-4@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=3D114027

--- Comment #4 from Li Pan <pan2.li at intel dot com> ---
Just did some hacks from the riscv backend, which is to replace the expandi=
ng
code of reduc_smax_scal_<mode> to the reduc_xor_scal_<mode>.

diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/autovec.md b/gcc/config/riscv/autovec.md
index 3b32369f68c..58424baabd7 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/autovec.md
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/autovec.md
@@ -2107,10 +2107,8 @@ (define_expand "reduc_smax_scal_<mode>"
    (match_operand:V_VLSI 1 "register_operand")]
   "TARGET_VECTOR"
 {
-  int prec =3D GET_MODE_PRECISION (<VEL>mode);
-  rtx min =3D immed_wide_int_const (wi::min_value (prec, SIGNED), <VEL>mod=
e);
-  riscv_vector::expand_reduction (UNSPEC_REDUC_MAX, riscv_vector::REDUCE_O=
P,
-                                  operands, min);
+  riscv_vector::expand_reduction (UNSPEC_REDUC_XOR, riscv_vector::REDUCE_O=
P,
+                                  operands, CONST0_RTX (<VEL>mode));
   DONE;
 })

My idea would like to prove that the last standard name should be .REDUC_XO=
R.

Then the test (include the narrowed and the original one) can pass. That may
indicates we take .REDUC_MAX by mistake in somewhere. let me try to figure =
it
out.=