[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 Alex Coplan changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz --- Comment #9 from Alex Coplan --- *** Bug 113184 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski --- Fixed.
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 --- Comment #7 from GCC Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a8124e341aebcc544b4720e920b625f4ffe4e8a commit r14-8194-g7a8124e341aebcc544b4720e920b625f4ffe4e8a Author: Andrew Pinski Date: Tue Jan 16 15:37:49 2024 -0800 aarch64: Fix aarch64_ldp_reg_operand predicate not to allow all subreg [PR113221] So the problem here is that aarch64_ldp_reg_operand will all subreg even subreg of lo_sum. When LRA tries to fix that up, all things break. So the fix is to change the check to only allow reg and subreg of regs. Note the tendancy here is to use register_operand but that checks the mode of the register but we need to allow a mismatch modes for this predicate for now. Built and tested for aarch64-linux-gnu with no regressions (Also tested with the LD/ST pair pass back on). PR target/113221 gcc/ChangeLog: * config/aarch64/predicates.md (aarch64_ldp_reg_operand): For subreg, only allow REG operands instead of allowing all. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.c-torture/compile/pr113221-1.c: New test. Signed-off-by: Andrew Pinski
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma ||il/gcc-patches/2024-January ||/643190.html --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- Patch submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/643190.html
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > Actually `(match_operand 0 "register_operand")` should be used instead of > the current `(match_code "reg,subreg")`. Except that does not work since register_operand checks the mode ... and then we fail to match: ``` (insn 46 45 47 2 (parallel [ (set (reg:V4SI 148) (unspec:V4SI [ (mem/c:V2x16QI (reg:DI 147) [0 +0 S32 A128]) ] UNSPEC_LDP_FST)) (set (reg:V4SI 149) (unspec:V4SI [ (mem/c:V2x16QI (reg:DI 147) [0 +0 S32 A128]) ] UNSPEC_LDP_SND)) ]) "../../../libgcc/libgcov-interface.c":211:2 -1 (nil)) ``` Because we only define the load_pair_16 for TImode and TImode != V4SImode here ... So Back to changing it to only test for reg and subreg of a reg then.
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Actually `(match_operand 0 "register_operand")` should be used instead of the current `(match_code "reg,subreg")`.
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- So I think aarch64_ldp_reg_operand allows too much, it allows `(subreg:SI (lo_sum:DI` when it should have just allowed `(subreg:SI (reg:`. I am going to see if that fixes the issue.
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Priority|P3 |P1
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
IRA decided to combine:
```
(insn 9 8 19 3 (set (reg/f:DI 104)
(lo_sum:DI (reg/f:DI 105)
(symbol_ref:DI ("bar") [flags 0x41] ))) "t.c":5:10 discrim 1 -1
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 105)
(expr_list:REG_EQUAL (symbol_ref:DI ("bar") [flags 0x41]
)
(nil
...
(insn 21 20 11 3 (set (reg/f:DI 110)
(lo_sum:DI (reg/f:DI 109)
(symbol_ref:DI ("bar") [flags 0x41] ))) "t.c":5:10 discrim 1 -1
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 109)
(expr_list:REG_EQUAL (symbol_ref:DI ("bar") [flags 0x41]
)
(nil
(insn 11 21 27 3 (parallel [
(set (reg:DI 106)
(plus:DI (reg:DI 106)
(const_int 4 [0x4])))
(set (mem:SI (reg:DI 106) [0 S4 A8])
(subreg:SI (reg/f:DI 104) 0))
(set (mem:SI (plus:DI (reg:DI 106)
(const_int 4 [0x4])) [0 S4 A8])
(subreg:SI (reg/f:DI 110) 0))
]) "t.c":5:10 discrim 1 102 {*storewb_post_pair_4}
(nil))
```
to:
```
(insn 11 20 27 3 (parallel [
(set (reg:DI 106)
(plus:DI (reg:DI 106)
(const_int 4 [0x4])))
(set (mem:SI (reg:DI 106) [0 S4 A8])
(subreg:SI (lo_sum:DI (reg/f:DI 105)
(symbol_ref:DI ("bar") [flags 0x41] )) 0))
(set (mem:SI (plus:DI (reg:DI 106)
(const_int 4 [0x4])) [0 S4 A8])
(subreg:SI (lo_sum:DI (reg/f:DI 109)
(symbol_ref:DI ("bar") [flags 0x41] )) 0))
]) "t.c":5:10 discrim 1 102 {*storewb_post_pair_4}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 109)
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 105)
(nil
```
But I have no idea why though ...
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-01-03 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Confirmed, but the IR from the ldp_fusion pass looks ok:
```
(insn 30 29 15 3 (set (reg/f:DI 110)
(lo_sum:DI (reg/f:DI 109)
(symbol_ref:DI ("_Z3barv") [flags 0x41] ))) "/app/example.cpp":5:10 discrim 1 -1
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 109)
(expr_list:REG_EQUAL (symbol_ref:DI ("_Z3barv") [flags 0x41]
)
(nil
(insn 15 30 32 3 (parallel [
(set (reg:DI 106)
(plus:DI (reg:DI 106)
(const_int 4 [0x4])))
(set (mem:SI (reg:DI 106) [0 S4 A8])
(subreg:SI (reg/f:DI 104) 0))
(set (mem:SI (plus:DI (reg:DI 106)
(const_int 4 [0x4])) [0 S4 A8])
(subreg:SI (reg/f:DI 110) 0))
]) "/app/example.cpp":5:10 discrim 1 102 {*storewb_post_pair_4}
(nil))
```
[Bug target/113221] [14 Regression][aarch64]ICE in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812 since r14-6605-gc0911c6b357ba9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113221 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
