From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 1ADEB385800D; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 19:13:32 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 1ADEB385800D From: "bergner at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/99041] combine creates invalid address which ICEs in decompose_normal_address Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2021 19:13:31 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 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: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2021 19:13:32 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99041 --- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Combiner tries to combine whatever it can and if it matches (and costs > suggest it is beneficial) it keeps it. > So, this looks like a target bug to me. > In particular, mma_assemble_input_operand predicate seems to allow any MEM > whatsoever as long as it has V16QImode: > (define_special_predicate "mma_assemble_input_operand" > (match_test "(mode =3D=3D V16QImode > && (vsx_register_operand (op, mode) || MEM_P (op)))")) > I don't believe it can allow any, there must be some requirement on what = the > address of the MEM can be, whether a REG + REG, REG + offset etc. and the > ICE is a proof it is not the case. Ahh, ok. I can make that more robust. Thanks for the pointer!=