[Bug rtl-optimization/95267] [ICE][gcse]: in process_insert_insn at gcse.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95267 --- Comment #7 from otcmaf --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5) > (In reply to otcmaf from comment #4) > > Do you mean that those pattern above are also wrong pattern ? > > YES those are broken. Ok, thanks very much.
[Bug rtl-optimization/95267] [ICE][gcse]: in process_insert_insn at gcse.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95267 zhongyunde at tom dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zhongyunde at tom dot com --- Comment #6 from zhongyunde at tom dot com --- *** Bug 95210 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug rtl-optimization/95267] [ICE][gcse]: in process_insert_insn at gcse.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95267 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to otcmaf from comment #4) > Do you mean that those pattern above are also wrong pattern ? YES those are broken.
[Bug rtl-optimization/95267] [ICE][gcse]: in process_insert_insn at gcse.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95267 --- Comment #4 from otcmaf --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > The internals documentation documents this even, read: > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/RTL-Template.html#index-match_005fdup > > From that: > Note that match_dup should not be used to tell the compiler that a > particular register is being used for two operands (example: add that adds > one register to another; the second register is both an input operand and > the output operand). Use a matching constraint (see Simple Constraints) for > those. However, in gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md also has the similar usage。 For example： 1227 (define_insn "aarch64_simd_move_hi_quad_" 1228 [(set (match_operand:VQ 0 "register_operand" "+w,w") 1229 (vec_concat:VQ 1230 (vec_select: 1231 (match_dup 0) 1232 (match_operand:VQ 2 "vect_par_cnst_lo_half" "")) 1233 (match_operand: 1 "register_operand" "w,r")))] 1234 "TARGET_SIMD && !BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN" 1235 "@ 1236ins\\t%0.d[1], %1.d[0] 1237ins\\t%0.d[1], %1" 1238 [(set_attr "type" "neon_ins")] 1239 ) the operands[0] is a inout reg, and the pattern also use (match_dup 0). Another case in gcc/config/c6x/c6x.md 440 (define_insn "*movstricthi_high" 441 [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "+ab") 442 (ior:SI (and:SI (match_dup 0) (const_int 65535)) 443 (ashift:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "const_int_operand" "IuB") 444(const_int 16] 445 "reload_completed" 446 "%|%.\\tmvklh\\t%$\\t%1, %0" 447 [(set_attr "units" "s")]) 2930 (define_insn "setup_dsbt" 2931 [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "pic_register_operand" "+Z") 2932 (unspec:SI [(match_dup 0) 2933 (match_operand:SI 1 "symbolic_operand" "")] 2934UNSPEC_SETUP_DSBT))] 2935 "TARGET_DSBT" 2936 "%|%.\\tldw\\t%$\\t*+%0($DSBT_index%1), %0" 2937 [(set_attr "type" "load") 2938(set_attr "units" "d_addr") 2939(set_attr "dest_regfile" "b") 2940(set_attr "addr_regfile" "b")]) Do you mean that those pattern above are also wrong pattern ? As you say that, that match_dup should not be used to tell the compiler that a particular register is being used for two operands. But I still think that the function can_assign_to_reg_without_clobbers_p can do bettter, use max_reg_num to replace FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER * 2 and update TEST_INSN when calling this function.
[Bug rtl-optimization/95267] [ICE][gcse]: in process_insert_insn at gcse.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95267 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- The internals documentation documents this even, read: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/RTL-Template.html#index-match_005fdup >From that: Note that match_dup should not be used to tell the compiler that a particular register is being used for two operands (example: add that adds one register to another; the second register is both an input operand and the output operand). Use a matching constraint (see Simple Constraints) for those.
[Bug rtl-optimization/95267] [ICE][gcse]: in process_insert_insn at gcse.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95267 --- Comment #2 from otcmaf --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > I think this is a back-end issue. > Can you provide the definition of movtv8hf16 ? > I don't think you can do: > (set (match_operand 0 predicate constraint) > (unspec:V8HF16 [ > (match_operand 1 predicate constraint) > (match_operand 2 predicate constraint) > (match_dup 0) > ] UNSPEC_MOVTVFM))) > > Rather you need to do: > (set (match_operand 0 predicate constraint) > (unspec:V8HF16 [ > (match_operand 1 predicate constraint) > (match_operand 2 predicate constraint) > (match_operand 3 predicate "0") > ] UNSPEC_MOVTVFM))) we use this definition of movtv8hf16: (define_insn "movtv8hf16" [(set (match_operand:V8HF16 0 "register_operand_s" "+Zrv") (unspec:V8HF16 [(match_operand:V8HF16 1 "register_operand_s" "Zrv") (match_operand:BF8 2 "register_operand_s" "Zrb") (match_dup 0)]UNSPEC_MOVTVFM))] why we can't use (match_dup 0) ?
[Bug rtl-optimization/95267] [ICE][gcse]: in process_insert_insn at gcse.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95267 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2020-05-22 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I think this is a back-end issue. Can you provide the definition of movtv8hf16 ? I don't think you can do: (set (match_operand 0 predicate constraint) (unspec:V8HF16 [ (match_operand 1 predicate constraint) (match_operand 2 predicate constraint) (match_dup 0) ] UNSPEC_MOVTVFM))) Rather you need to do: (set (match_operand 0 predicate constraint) (unspec:V8HF16 [ (match_operand 1 predicate constraint) (match_operand 2 predicate constraint) (match_operand 3 predicate "0") ] UNSPEC_MOVTVFM)))
