From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 122959 invoked by alias); 7 Apr 2017 08:39:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 122937 invoked by uid 89); 7 Apr 2017 08:39:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=our X-HELO: smtp.eu.adacore.com Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO smtp.eu.adacore.com) (194.98.77.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 08:39:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A17BD8133E; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 10:39:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.eu.adacore.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12dmlHvAkV5n; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 10:39:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from polaris.localnet (bon31-6-88-161-99-133.fbx.proxad.net [88.161.99.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 802DA81339; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 10:39:04 +0200 (CEST) From: Eric Botcazou To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Kelvin Nilsen Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR80101: Fix ICE in store_data_bypass_p Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 08:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: <2042575.QfhRid7aWy@polaris> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/3.16.7-53-desktop; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20170407074824.GU4402@gate.crashing.org> References: <3316696.3QEehbYcbO@polaris> <20170407074824.GU4402@gate.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-SW-Source: 2017-04/txt/msg00353.txt.bz2 > Or we could just change "blockage" and wait for the next bug report. That's my suggestion, yes. > Alternatively, we can arrange for the bypass functions to not ICE. We > can do that specific to these rs6000 pipeline descriptions, by having > our own version of store_data_bypass_p; or we can make that function > work for all insns (its definition works fine for insn pairs where > not both the producer and consumer are SETs). That's what Kelvin's > patch does. What is the value in ICEing here? Telling the back-end writer that something may be wrong somewhere instead of silently accepting nonsense? How long have all the assertions been there? -- Eric Botcazou