From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] combine: Fix ICE in try_combine on pr112494.c [PR112560]
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 15:35:51 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240307213551.GL19790@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFULd4an129W1CTMtSe0suZ+dg7sCuzgz__0X9vum46yF7YBvw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 10:04:32PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
[snip]
> The part we want to fix deals with the *user* of the CC register. It
> is not true that this is always COMPARISON_P, so EQ, NE, GE, LT, ...
> in the form of
>
> (LT:CCGC (reg:CCGC 17 flags) (const_int 0))
>
> but can be something else, such as the above noted
>
> (unspec:DI [
> (reg:CC 17 flags)
> ] UNSPEC_PUSHFL)
But that is invalid RTL? The only valid use of a CC is written as
cc-compared-to-0. It means "the result of something compared to 0,
stored in that cc reg".
(And you can copy a CC reg around, but that is not a use ;-) )
> The source code that deals with the *user* of the CC register assumes
> the former form, so it blindly tries to update the mode of the CC
> register inside LT comparison RTX
Would you like it better if there was an assert for this? There are
very many RTL requirements that aren't chacked for currently :-/
> (some other nearby source code even
> checks for (const_int 0) RTX). Obviously, this is not the case with
> the former form, where the update tries to:
>
> SUBST (XEXP (*cc_use_loc, 0), ...)
>
> on unspec, which has no XEXP (..., 0).
>
> And *this* is what triggers RTX checking assert.
The unspec should have the CC compared with 0 as argument.
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-07 21:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-07 9:16 Uros Bizjak
2024-03-07 9:55 ` Richard Biener
2024-03-07 10:11 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-07 10:22 ` Richard Biener
2024-03-07 17:44 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-03-07 10:37 ` Jakub Jelinek
2024-03-07 10:45 ` Richard Biener
2024-03-07 11:22 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-07 17:51 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-03-07 17:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-03-07 10:57 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-07 17:36 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-03-07 21:04 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-07 21:08 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-07 21:35 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2024-03-07 22:07 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-07 22:27 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-03-07 22:46 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-18 14:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-03-18 15:44 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-07 22:27 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-03-18 14:44 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-03-18 15:29 ` Uros Bizjak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240307213551.GL19790@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).