[Bug tree-optimization/95854] New: ICE in find_bswap_or_nop_1 of pass store-merging

[Bug tree-optimization/95854] New: ICE in find_bswap_or_nop_1 of pass store-merging

[zhoukaipeng3 at huawei dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95854

            Bug ID: 95854
           Summary: ICE in find_bswap_or_nop_1 of pass store-merging
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: tree-optimization
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: zhoukaipeng3 at huawei dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

ICE log:

during GIMPLE pass: store-merging
pr87132.c: In function ‘main’:
pr87132.c:5:5: internal compiler error: in tree_to_uhwi, at tree.c:7332
    5 | int main()
      |     ^~~~
0xfc2fcf tree_to_uhwi(tree_node const*)
        ../.././gcc/tree.c:7332
0xfc2fcf tree_to_uhwi(tree_node const*)
        ../.././gcc/tree.c:7330
0x169420b find_bswap_or_nop_1
        ../.././gcc/gimple-ssa-store-merging.c:602
0x1696c1b find_bswap_or_nop_1
        ../.././gcc/gimple-ssa-store-merging.c:589
0x1696c1b process_store
        ../.././gcc/gimple-ssa-store-merging.c:4773
0x1696c1b execute
        ../.././gcc/gimple-ssa-store-merging.c:4996


Command: gcc -S -march=armv8.5-a+sve2 -fno-vect-cost-model -fno-tree-scev-cprop
 -O3 -ftracer pr87132.c

GCC version: gcc version 11.0.0 20200618 (experimental) (GCC)

The problem occurs in find_bswap_or_nop_1.
The stmt is "_27 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect__2.16_92, 32, POLY_INT_CST [96, 128]>". 
So "tree_to_uhwi (TREE_OPERAND (rhs1, 2))" failed.

I plan to add a judgement before to make sure both TREE_OPERAND (rhs1, 1) and
TREE_OPERAND (rhs1, 2) are INTEGER_CST.

[Bug tree-optimization/95854] ICE in find_bswap_or_nop_1 of pass store-merging

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95854

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |ice-on-valid-code
             Target|                            |aarch64
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2020-06-24
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed by code inspection.

[Bug tree-optimization/95854] ICE in find_bswap_or_nop_1 of pass store-merging

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95854

--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener <rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:35cf3c55165efe8226cb9e5397ab0620130396ea

commit r11-1704-g35cf3c55165efe8226cb9e5397ab0620130396ea
Author: Kaipeng Zhou <zhoukaipeng3@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed Jun 24 22:48:45 2020 +0800

    store-merging: ICE in find_bswap_or_nop_1 PR95854.

    The patch add a judgement in find_bswap_or_nop_1 to make sure both
    operand1 and operand2 cannot be converted to unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT.
    If not, return NULL.

    gcc/ChangeLog:

    2020-06-24  Kaipeng Zhou  <zhoukaipeng3@huawei.com>

            PR tree-optimization/95854
            * gimple-ssa-store-merging.c (find_bswap_or_nop_1): Return NULL
            if operand 1 or 2 of a BIT_FIELD_REF cannot be converted to
            unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

    2020-06-24  Kaipeng Zhou  <zhoukaipeng3@huawei.com>

            PR tree-optimization/95854
            * gcc.dg/pr95854.c: New test.

[Bug tree-optimization/95854] ICE in find_bswap_or_nop_1 of pass store-merging

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95854

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

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

--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.