[Bug target/61060] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE: in int_mode_for_mode, at stor-layout.c:400 with -free-ter

["ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61060

Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-05-05
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
Confirmed, modeless (const_int 0) leaks to line 24181.

(gdb) f 7
#7  0x0000000000c4fc71 in ix86_expand_set_or_movmem (dst=0x7ffff19c5d50,
src=0x10048e0 <int_mode_for_mode(machine_mode)::__FUNCTION__>, src@entry=0x0,
count_exp=0x7ffff18a5470, val_exp=0x190, 
    val_exp@entry=0x7ffff18a5510, align_exp=0x64,
align_exp@entry=0x7ffff18a5480, expected_align_exp=0x7ff9fffff00,
expected_align_exp@entry=0x7ffff18a5480, expected_size_exp=0x7ffff18a5460, 
    min_size_exp=0x0, max_size_exp=0x190, max_size_exp@entry=0x7ffff18a5510,
probable_max_size_exp=0x10048e0
<int_mode_for_mode(machine_mode)::__FUNCTION__>,
probable_max_size_exp@entry=0x0, 
    issetmem=true) at /home/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386.c:24182
24182       count_exp = copy_to_mode_reg (GET_MODE (count_exp), count_exp);
(gdb) p debug_rtx (count_exp)
(const_int 0 [0])
$9 = void
(gdb) list
24177        creating of promoted vector value is very cheap in this case.  */
24178     if (issetmem && alg == vector_loop && val_exp != const0_rtx)
24179       alg = unrolled_loop;
24180
24181     if (!count)
24182       count_exp = copy_to_mode_reg (GET_MODE (count_exp), count_exp);
24183     destreg = ix86_copy_addr_to_reg (XEXP (dst, 0));
24184     if (!issetmem)
24185       srcreg = ix86_copy_addr_to_reg (XEXP (src, 0));
24186
>From gcc-bugs-return-450607-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon May 05 18:18:34 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-450607-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20388 invoked by alias); 5 May 2014 18:18:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20366 invoked by uid 48); 5 May 2014 18:18:31 -0000
From: "gjl at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/61055] [avr] wrong test instruction after increment with -O1
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 18:18:00 -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: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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-61055-4-oEKXoN4H7q@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61055-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61055-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00299.txt.bz2
Content-length: 405

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ida055

--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay <gjl at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I see similar code with -fno-peephole2

What about the following that is also turned into a signed test and generates
an ADIW / BRGE sequence.  This is also wrong then when we start with 0x7ffe?

uint16_t fun_adiw (uint16_t c)
{
  c += 2;
  if (c >= 0x8000)
    c = 0x20;

  return c;
}