[Bug target/113115] [14 Regression] ICE In extract_constrain_insn_cached recog.cc with ppc64le-linux-gnu crosscompiler from r14-3592-g9ea1248604d7b6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113115
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #5)
> I really dislike the -mpower{8,9}-vector options, but maybe it's too late to
> remove them for this release? I'm not sure how involved/invasive that patch
> would be. Segher, do you have a preference on remove them now or use the
> workaround above and remove in the next release?
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #6)
> Using -mpower9-vector while not having -mcpu=power9 (or later) is wrong, and
> should
> not work. Using -mno-power9-vector is just weird.
>
> If we can neuter the -mpower9-vector (etc.) options now, that would be good.
> But
> there are some complications with the testsuite at least?
OK, it sounds that it's still acceptable to adjust this at this time point, so
I'm working on a patch to evaluate its impact, will post it after full testing.
[Bug target/113115] [14 Regression] ICE In extract_constrain_insn_cached recog.cc with ppc64le-linux-gnu crosscompiler from r14-3592-g9ea1248604d7b6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113115 --- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool --- Using -mpower9-vector while not having -mcpu=power9 (or later) is wrong, and should not work. Using -mno-power9-vector is just weird. If we can neuter the -mpower9-vector (etc.) options now, that would be good. But there are some complications with the testsuite at least?
[Bug target/113115] [14 Regression] ICE In extract_constrain_insn_cached recog.cc with ppc64le-linux-gnu crosscompiler from r14-3592-g9ea1248604d7b6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113115
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #4)
> Yes, I agree it's duplicated of PR109987, Jeevitha's commit just exposed
> this known issue, since we are in stage 3, I wonder if we can go with
> power9-vector guarding first
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/587310.html) since
> power9-vector still exists in this release, and we can try to remove these
> workaround options in next release. (Sorry that I missed to follow up the
> power{8,9}-vector removal)
I really dislike the -mpower{8,9}-vector options, but maybe it's too late to
remove them for this release? I'm not sure how involved/invasive that patch
would be. Segher, do you have a preference on remove them now or use the
workaround above and remove in the next release?
[Bug target/113115] [14 Regression] ICE In extract_constrain_insn_cached recog.cc with ppc64le-linux-gnu crosscompiler from r14-3592-g9ea1248604d7b6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113115
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #3)
> Ke Wen, is this just a duplicate of PR109987 and PR103627? I know it was
> bisected to Jeevitha's commit, but it seems more like her commit exposed the
> same latent issue as those other PRs, rather than causing it. Your thoughts?
Yes, I agree it's duplicated of PR109987, Jeevitha's commit just exposed this
known issue, since we are in stage 3, I wonder if we can go with power9-vector
guarding first
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/587310.html) since
power9-vector still exists in this release, and we can try to remove these
workaround options in next release. (Sorry that I missed to follow up the
power{8,9}-vector removal)
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 109987 ***
[Bug target/113115] [14 Regression] ICE In extract_constrain_insn_cached recog.cc with ppc64le-linux-gnu crosscompiler from r14-3592-g9ea1248604d7b6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113115 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org, ||dje at gcc dot gnu.org, ||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org, ||segher at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner --- Ke Wen, is this just a duplicate of PR109987 and PR103627? I know it was bisected to Jeevitha's commit, but it seems more like her commit exposed the same latent issue as those other PRs, rather than causing it. Your thoughts?
[Bug target/113115] [14 Regression] ICE In extract_constrain_insn_cached recog.cc with ppc64le-linux-gnu crosscompiler from r14-3592-g9ea1248604d7b6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113115 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-01-08 Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Confirmed by bisection.
[Bug target/113115] [14 Regression] ICE In extract_constrain_insn_cached recog.cc with ppc64le-linux-gnu crosscompiler from r14-3592-g9ea1248604d7b6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113115 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0
