From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id EF3EA398B164; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 14:58:43 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org EF3EA398B164 From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/99767] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in expand_direct_optab_fn, at internal-fn.c:3360 Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 14:58:43 +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: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.4 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: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 14:58:44 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99767 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Note, we have already: /* Stub out scalar statements that must not survive vectorization. Doing this here helps with grouped statements, or statements that are involved in patterns. */ for (gimple_stmt_iterator gsi =3D gsi_start_bb (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi)) { gcall *call =3D dyn_cast (gsi_stmt (gsi)); if (call && gimple_call_internal_p (call, IFN_MASK_LOAD)) { tree lhs =3D gimple_get_lhs (call); if (!VECTOR_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (lhs))) { tree zero =3D build_zero_cst (TREE_TYPE (lhs)); gimple *new_stmt =3D gimple_build_assign (lhs, zero); gsi_replace (&gsi, new_stmt, true); } } } in tree-vect-loop.c. Perhaps we should handle similarly IFN_COND_* ? Instead of using zero for those perhaps we could just use the last argument= of those calls (i.e. the ELSE part).=