[Bug rtl-optimization/60307] define_cond_exec with cc0 comparison generates wrong code, missing insn that sets cc0

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60307

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
>It's new processor architecture. It doesn't present in GCC sources.


No targets should not be a cc0 target.  cc0 targets cause more issues than what
you really want to deal with.  There are very few cc0 targets left in GCC
already too.

[Bug rtl-optimization/60307] define_cond_exec with cc0 comparison generates wrong code, missing insn that sets cc0

[mikpelinux at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60307

--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com ---
Which target is this?  Can you provide a test case?

[Bug rtl-optimization/60307] define_cond_exec with cc0 comparison generates wrong code, missing insn that sets cc0

[makhaloff at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60307

--- Comment #2 from Alexey Makhalov makhaloff at gmail dot com ---
It's new processor architecture. It doesn't present in GCC sources.

I've took a look through all targets and figured out that there are no targets
who supports cc0 and conditional execution together. So it looks like never
used/tested field.

Also I've met a problem with conditional move and cc0. I get ICE at reload
pass. I don't know what happens. I'm working on it now.