On 11/6/23 06:01, Maxim Blinov wrote:
From: Maxim Blinov <maxim.bli...@imgtec.com>
This patch is based on and intended for the
vendors/riscv/gcc-13-with-riscv-opts branch - please apply if looks OK.
Fixes the following ICEs that I'm seeing:
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/O3-pr49087.c (internal compiler error: in
vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-pr86725-1.c (internal compiler error: in
vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-pr86725-2.c (internal compiler error: in
vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-pr86725-3.c (internal compiler error: in
vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-pr86725-4.c (internal compiler error: in
vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (internal compiler error: in vect_transform_loops,
at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error:
in vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-50.c (internal compiler error: in vect_transform_loops,
at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-50.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: in
vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-13.c (internal compiler error: in
vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-13.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler
error: in vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-live-6.c (internal compiler error: in
vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-live-6.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler
error: in vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/partial/live-1.c (internal compiler error:
in vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/partial/live-2.c (internal compiler error:
in vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032)
-- >8 --
When we create a VEC_EXPAND gimple stmt:
/* SCALAR_RES = VEC_EXTRACT <VEC_LHS, LEN + BIAS - 1>. */
tree scalar_res
= gimple_build (&stmts, CFN_VEC_EXTRACT, TREE_TYPE (vectype),
vec_lhs_phi, last_index);
Under the hood we are really just creating a GIMPLE_CALL stmt. Later
on, when we `gsi_insert_seq_before` our stmts:
if (stmts)
{
gimple_stmt_iterator exit_gsi = gsi_after_labels (exit_bb);
gsi_insert_seq_before (&exit_gsi, stmts, GSI_SAME_STMT);
We eventually run into tree-ssa-operands.cc:1147:
operands_scanner (fn, stmt).build_ssa_operands ();
Since VEC_EXPAND is *not* marked with ECF_NOVOPS, ECF_CONST, or
ECF_PURE flags in internal-fn.def, when
`operand_scanner::parse_ssa_operands` comes across our
VEC_EXTRACT-type GIMPLE_CALL, it generates a `gimple_vop()` artificial
variable.
`operand_scanner::finalize_ssa_defs` then picks this up, so our final
stmt goes from
_73 = .VEC_EXTRACT (vect_last_9.56_71, _72);
to
# .MEM = VDEF <>
_73 = .VEC_EXTRACT (vect_last_9.56_71, _72);
But more importantly it marks us as `ssa_renaming_needed`, in
tree-ssa-operands.cc:420:
/* If we have a non-SSA_NAME VDEF, mark it for renaming. */
if (gimple_vdef (stmt)
&& TREE_CODE (gimple_vdef (stmt)) != SSA_NAME)
{
fn->gimple_df->rename_vops = 1;
fn->gimple_df->ssa_renaming_needed = 1;
}
This then proceeds to crash the compiler when we are about to leave
`vect_transform_loops`:
if (need_ssa_update_p (cfun))
{
gcc_assert (loop_vinfo->any_known_not_updated_vssa);
fun->gimple_df->ssa_renaming_needed = false;
todo |= TODO_update_ssa_only_virtuals;
}
Since,
- `need_ssa_update_p (cfun)` is true (it was set when we generated a
memory vdef)
- `loop_vinfo->any_known_not_updated_vssa` is false
As the code currently stands, creating a gimple stmt containing a
VEC_EXTRACT should always generate a memory vdef, therefore we should
remember to mark `loop_vinfo->any_known_not_updated_vssa` afterwards.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* tree-vect-loop.cc (vectorizable_live_operation): Remember to
assert loop_vinfo->any_known_not_updated_vssa if we are inserting
a call to VEC_EXPAND.
Just to avoid any doubt -- with the internal-fn.def patch I cherry
picked earlier this week to the branch, this is no longer needed, right?
jeff
