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 85181389040A; Thu,  4 Jun 2020 18:50:56 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 85181389040A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1591296656;
 bh=oZJXtNMYsS6Lc56c8/vl4Wdflknaa6vha3zO1hjz8yI=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=bp9onj82PV+inec4QQbf+mv0a1YFBARCmSVzQP9yqck6TwtIZ8m2Nd6bV1OMbig0l
 nL/ql7r+mb1nNsEf6If/c06UMFH2qku4+tPUz4NgGb1RlCiXX8vupX4AJREwYEhqAe
 rNab9K3oxc4Ytx4Iul5MDcTCIDEmJ4l7A3+0Di+c=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/95528] [10/11 Regression] internal compiler error:
 in emit_move_insn, at expr.c:3814
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 18:50:56 +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: 10.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, needs-bisection
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub 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: 10.2
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-95528-4-Ysp6K3hz63@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-95528-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-95528-4@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: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 18:50:56 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95528

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Adjusted testcase so that there are no warnings:
template <typename a> struct b {
  typedef a c __attribute__((vector_size(sizeof(a) * 4)));
  union {
    c d;
    struct {
      a e, f, g, h;
    };
  };
  b();
  b(const b &i) : d(i.d) {}
  static b j(c);
  template <typename k> operator b<k>() {
    b<k>::j(typename b<k>::c{k(e), k(f), k(g), k(h)});
    return b<k>();
  }
};
template <typename a> using l =3D b<a>;
using m =3D l<char>;
using n =3D l<short>;
m o(n i) { return i; }
b<short> q;
void p() { o(q); }

What vec_pack_trunc_si does looks completely reasonable for the vector bool
types that have integral modes (i.e. AVX512F+ masks).
I'd say the vectorizer/simplify_vector_constructor just shouldn't attempt to
use these (e.g. vec_pack*, vec_unpack* optabs) for !VEC_MODE_P unless it is
VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P type.
For i386 it would be the right thing as the patterns really assume that it =
is
vector booleans and have their properties.
Though, aarch64 seems to have vec_pack_trunc_di and vec_pack_trunc_df
expanders, it is unclear to me what they are for and if they are really use=
d.
Other targets seem to only define these for vector modes.=