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 457FE3851429; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 08:38:50 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 457FE3851429
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1586939930;
 bh=aZvV8IygBRIUkRXYF8mAamSb2DcBW4y/T+VeXttqcwc=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=CZfp5vbiJ41Zj1wQWWZsmEi48uHOSSWTGKaLMNtZaNEyU+O9ize597/l7f6Bl44u9
 Iue5J1wvaezQ5IGkml97K7ZbS8iZGiU4tVICs/8u7MFrAxh+t/8ktgAPZoDBTSX4bH
 a7mmw+xzSmImR9eeRKy7Tc2LA86U/GUUWYvsFx6A=
From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/94603] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2343
 (unrecognizable insn) with -mno-sse2 and __builtin_ia32_movq128
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 08:38:50 +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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-94603-4-iTZSzplQgY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-94603-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-94603-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 08:38:50 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94603

--- Comment #6 from Uro=C5=A1 Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> (In reply to Uro=C5=A1 Bizjak from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > > The testcase will need -msse -mno-sse2.
> >=20
> > Yes, but the testcase is invalid, because __builtin_ia32_movq128 should=
 not
> > be used without SSE2. Fixed compiler reports:
> >=20
> > pr94603.c: In function =E2=80=98foo=E2=80=99:
> > pr94603.c:6:10: warning: implicit declaration of function
> > =E2=80=98__builtin_ia32_movq128=E2=80=99; did you mean =E2=80=98__built=
in_ia32_movntps=E2=80=99?
> > [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
> > pr94603.c:6:10: error: incompatible types when returning type =E2=80=98=
int=E2=80=99 but =E2=80=98V=E2=80=99
> > {aka =E2=80=98__vector(2) long long int=E2=80=99} was expected
>=20
> I know.  But we (often) include even invalid testcases, perhaps with just
> dg-error "" and dg-warning "" (or use -w too) if we don't care about exact
> wording but just want to verify there is no ICE.

This is the testcase:

--cut here--
/* PR target/94603 */
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-Wno-implicit-function-declaration -msse -mno-sse2" } */

typedef long long __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16))) V;

V
foo (V v)
{
  return __builtin_ia32_movq128 (v);  /* { dg-error "" } */
}
--cut here--=