[Bug target/94368] [9/10 Regression] ICE in final_scan_insn_1, at final.c:3074(error: could not split insn) on aarch64-linux-gnu since r9-3744

2020-03-31 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94368

--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a27c534794dbe3530acae3427d2c58f937f1b050

commit r10-7472-ga27c534794dbe3530acae3427d2c58f937f1b050
Author: Jakub Jelinek 
Date:   Tue Mar 31 11:08:22 2020 +0200

aarch64: Fix up aarch64_compare_and_swaphi pattern [PR94368]

The following testcase ICEs in final_scan_insn_1.  The problem is in the
@aarch64_compare_and_swaphi define_insn_and_split, since 9 it uses
aarch64_plushi_operand predicate for the "expected value" operand, which
allows either 0..0xfff constants or 0x1000..0xf000 constants (i.e. HImode
values which when zero extended are either 0..0xfff or (0..0xfff) << 12).
The problem is that RA doesn't care about predicates, it honors just
constraints and the used constraint on the operand is n, which means any
HImode CONST_SCALAR_INT.  In the testcase LRA thus propagates the -1
value into the insn.
This is a define_insn_and_split which requires mandatory split.
But during split2 pass, we check the predicate (and don't check
constraints), which fails and thus we don't split it and during final ICE
because the mandatory splitting didn't happen.

The following patch fixes it by adding a matching constraint to the
predicate and using it.

2020-03-31  Jakub Jelinek  

PR target/94368
* config/aarch64/constraints.md (Uph): New constraint.
* config/aarch64/atomics.md (cas_short_expected_imm): New mode
attr.
(@aarch64_compare_and_swap): Use it instead of n in operand
2's
constraint.

* gcc.dg/pr94368.c: New test.

[Bug target/94368] [9/10 Regression] ICE in final_scan_insn_1, at final.c:3074(error: could not split insn) on aarch64-linux-gnu since r9-3744

2020-03-30 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94368

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
The problem is that RA doesn't care about predicates, only constraints, and so
the constraints need to match the predicates, or it needs to be ensured in insn
conditions instead.

[Bug target/94368] [9/10 Regression] ICE in final_scan_insn_1, at final.c:3074(error: could not split insn) on aarch64-linux-gnu since r9-3744

2020-03-30 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94368

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Created attachment 48143
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48143=edit
gcc10-pr94368.patch

Untested fix.