[Bug target/94438] New: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[Bug target/94438] New: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[zsojka at seznam dot cz]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94438

            Bug ID: 94438
           Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed:
                    position plus size exceeds size of referenced object
                    in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl
           Product: gcc
           Version: 10.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: target
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: zsojka at seznam dot cz
  Target Milestone: ---
              Host: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

Created attachment 48161
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48161&action=edit
reduced testcase

Compiler output:
$ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl testcase.c 
testcase.c: In function 'foo':
testcase.c:4:1: error: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in
'bit_field_ref'
    4 | foo (void)
      | ^~~
_8 = BIT_FIELD_REF <_7, 128, 0>;
during GIMPLE pass: veclower
testcase.c:4:1: internal compiler error: verify_gimple failed
0x102b7aa verify_gimple_in_cfg(function*, bool)
        /repo/gcc-trunk/gcc/tree-cfg.c:5459
0xeed15f execute_function_todo
        /repo/gcc-trunk/gcc/passes.c:1985
0xeedfac do_per_function
        /repo/gcc-trunk/gcc/passes.c:1640
0xeedfac execute_todo
        /repo/gcc-trunk/gcc/passes.c:2039
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.

$ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/repo/gcc-trunk/binary-latest/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/repo/gcc-trunk/binary-trunk-r10-7475-20200331110822-g1ef979c6966-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.0.1/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /repo/gcc-trunk//configure --enable-languages=c,c++
--enable-valgrind-annotations --disable-nls --enable-checking=yes,rtl,df,extra
--with-cloog --with-ppl --with-isl --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
--host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
--with-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r10-7475-20200331110822-g1ef979c6966-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.1 20200331 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug target/94438] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94438

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2020-04-01
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW

--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Adjusted testcase so that it doesn't use uninitialized var:

typedef __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (sizeof (__int128)))) __int128 V;

void
foo (V w)
{
  V v = 0 <= (0 >= w);
}

And:
typedef __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (4 * sizeof (__int128)))) __int128 V;

void
foo (V w)
{
  V v = 0 <= (0 >= w);
}

ICEs in another spot (only -mavx512vbmi is needed for this one):
during RTL pass: expand
pr94438-2.c: In function ‘foo’:
pr94438-2.c:6:11: internal compiler error: in expand_vec_cond_expr, at
optabs.c:5884
    6 |   V v = 0 <= (0 >= w);
      |         ~~^~~~~~~~~~~
0x10edd07 expand_vec_cond_expr(tree_node*, tree_node*, tree_node*, tree_node*,
rtx_def*)
        ../../gcc/optabs.c:5882
0xd20e4b do_store_flag
        ../../gcc/expr.c:12148

[Bug target/94438] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94438

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |8.5
           Priority|P3                          |P2

--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Both testcases ICE since r7-1075-g0561bcfb825ec512375f06c5b2199d44263832cb.

[Bug target/94438] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94438

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 48172
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48172&action=edit
gcc10-pr94438.patch

Untested fix.  It seems completely wrong to try to use int masks for V*TImode,
the hook correctly only supports V*[SD]Imode if not -mavx512bw, but with
-mavx512bw it just doesn't check elem_size at all.

[Bug target/94438] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94438

--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek <jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8bf5faa9c463f0d53ffe835ba03d4502edfb959d

commit r10-7632-g8bf5faa9c463f0d53ffe835ba03d4502edfb959d
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed Apr 8 18:24:12 2020 +0200

    i386: Don't use AVX512F integral masks for V*TImode [PR94438]

    The ix86_get_mask_mode hook uses int mask for 512-bit vectors or
128/256-bit
    vectors with AVX512VL (that is correct), and only for V*[SD][IF]mode if not
    AVX512BW (also correct), but with AVX512BW it would stop checking the
    elem_size altogether and pretend the hw has masking support for V*TImode
    etc., which it doesn't.  That can lead to various ICEs later on.

    2020-04-08  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

            PR target/94438
            * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_get_mask_mode): Only use int mask for
elem_size
            1, 2, 4 and 8.

            * gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-pr94438.c: New test.
            * gcc.target/i386/avx512vlbw-pr94438.c: New test.

[Bug target/94438] [8/9 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94438

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] ICE:    |[8/9 Regression] ICE:
                   |verify_gimple failed:       |verify_gimple failed:
                   |position plus size exceeds  |position plus size exceeds
                   |size of referenced object   |size of referenced object
                   |in 'bit_field_ref' with     |in 'bit_field_ref' with
                   |-mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl     |-mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed on the trunk so far.

[Bug target/94438] [8/9 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94438

--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
<jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cb09410d3c61d325c64b17eabe9dfd1609cec1a6

commit r9-8876-gcb09410d3c61d325c64b17eabe9dfd1609cec1a6
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed Apr 8 18:24:12 2020 +0200

    i386: Don't use AVX512F integral masks for V*TImode [PR94438]

    The ix86_get_mask_mode hook uses int mask for 512-bit vectors or
128/256-bit
    vectors with AVX512VL (that is correct), and only for V*[SD][IF]mode if not
    AVX512BW (also correct), but with AVX512BW it would stop checking the
    elem_size altogether and pretend the hw has masking support for V*TImode
    etc., which it doesn't.  That can lead to various ICEs later on.

    2020-04-08  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

            PR target/94438
            * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_get_mask_mode): Only use int mask for
elem_size
            1, 2, 4 and 8.

            * gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-pr94438.c: New test.
            * gcc.target/i386/avx512vlbw-pr94438.c: New test.

    (cherry picked from commit 8bf5faa9c463f0d53ffe835ba03d4502edfb959d)

[Bug target/94438] [8/9 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: position plus size exceeds size of referenced object in 'bit_field_ref' with -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vl

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94438

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED

--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed for 8.5 in r8-10485-g212ae35e5a9b554748c1340015968fda1d1fa0d8 and by the
above commit for 9.4+ too.