Is calculix big ?

Could you give me the testcase to reproduce it?

For +  gcc_assert (biggest_size >= mode_size);
I currently don't have an idea to fix it.

But for +  mode = TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (lhs));
I think I can fix it. 

if (!gimple_store_p (stmt))
                {
                  tree lhs = gimple_get_lhs (stmt);
                  mode = TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (lhs));

If it is not a STORE, I assume it always has a LHS. Turns out that my original thought is incorrect.
I think I know the fix.





juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai
 
From: Robin Dapp
Date: 2023-09-12 17:17
To: Juzhe-Zhong; gcc-patches
CC: rdapp.gcc; kito.cheng; kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] RISC-V: Support Dynamic LMUL Cost model
I did some benchmarks and, at least for calculix the differences are
miniscule.  I'd say we can stick with the current approach and improve
as needed.
 
However, I noticed ICEs here:
 
+  gcc_assert (biggest_size >= mode_size);
 
and here:
 
+  mode = TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (lhs));
 
when compiling calculix.
 
Regards
Robin