https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93418
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:764e831291a2e510978ca7be0bffb55589a5a0b6
commit r9-8214-g764e831291a2e510978ca7be0bffb55589a5a0b6
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Tue Jan 28 08:46:23 2020 +0100
i386: Fix ix86_fold_builtin shift folding [PR93418]
The following testcase is miscompiled, because the variable shift left
operand, { -1, -1, -1, -1 } is represented as a VECTOR_CST with
VECTOR_CST_NPATTERNS 1 and VECTOR_CST_NELTS_PER_PATTERN 1, so when
we call builder.new_unary_operation, builder.encoded_nelts () will be just
1
and thus we encode the resulting vector as if all the elements were the
same.
For non-masked is_vshift, we could perhaps call
builder.new_binary_operation
(TREE_TYPE (args[0]), args[0], args[1], false), but then there are masked
shifts, for non-is_vshift we could perhaps call it too but with args[2]
instead of args[1], but there is no builder.new_ternary_operation.
All this stuff is primarily for aarch64 anyway, on x86 we don't have any
variable length vectors, and it is not a big deal to compute all elements
and just let builder.finalize () find the most efficient VECTOR_CST
representation of the vector. So, instead of doing too much, this just
keeps using new_unary_operation only if only one VECTOR_CST is involved
(i.e. non-masked shift by constant) and for the rest just compute all elts.
2020-01-28 Jakub Jelinek
PR target/93418
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_fold_builtin) : If mask is not
-1 or is_vshift is true, use new_vector with number of elts npatterns
rather than new_unary_operation.
* gcc.target/i386/avx2-pr93418.c: New test.
