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 E0B703851C03; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 23:59:38 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E0B703851C03
From: "bergner at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/98959] ICE in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2670
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 23:59:38 +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: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: bergner 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: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-98959-4-mVOkDn3fWf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-98959-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-98959-4@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: <https://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: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 23:59:39 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D98959

--- Comment #17 from Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #16)
> The question I have is, there are 2 expanders which I think we also need =
to
> guard with similar tests.  They are vsx_load_<mode> and vsx_store_<mode>.=
=20
> Segher, I assume we want to verify we don't have an altivec style & ~16
> address there too, correct?  Just like we do in vector.md's mov<mode>
> pattern.

Ie, adding the following hunks to the patch above:

@@ -1241,7 +1245,8 @@
   "VECTOR_MEM_VSX_P (<MODE>mode)"
 {
   /* Expand to swaps if needed, prior to swap optimization.  */
-  if (!BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN && !TARGET_P9_VECTOR)
+  if (!BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN && !TARGET_P9_VECTOR
+      && !altivec_indexed_or_indirect_operand(operands[1], <MODE>mode))
     {
       rs6000_emit_le_vsx_move (operands[0], operands[1], <MODE>mode);
       DONE;
@@ -1254,7 +1259,8 @@
   "VECTOR_MEM_VSX_P (<MODE>mode)"
 {
   /* Expand to swaps if needed, prior to swap optimization.  */
-  if (!BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN && !TARGET_P9_VECTOR)
+  if (!BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN && !TARGET_P9_VECTOR
+      && !altivec_indexed_or_indirect_operand(operands[0], <MODE>mode))
     {
       rs6000_emit_le_vsx_move (operands[0], operands[1], <MODE>mode);
       DONE;=