[Bug target/94740] ICE on testsuite/gcc.dg/sso/t5.c with -mcpu=future -mpcrel -O1

2020-04-24 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94740 --- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner --- Removing the bswap and recompiling, the non-bswap load pattern has no problem accepting an address like that, so this looks like a target issue with that pattern.

[Bug target/94740] ICE on testsuite/gcc.dg/sso/t5.c with -mcpu=future -mpcrel -O1

2020-04-24 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94740 --- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner --- Here's a simpler test case that fails the same way: int array[8]; int foo (void) { return __builtin_bswap32 (array[1]); } So before CSE, we have: (insn 5 2 6 2 (set (reg/f:DI 121)

[Bug target/94740] ICE on testsuite/gcc.dg/sso/t5.c with -mcpu=future -mpcrel -O1

2020-04-24 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94740 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/94740] ICE on testsuite/gcc.dg/sso/t5.c with -mcpu=future -mpcrel -O1

2020-04-23 Thread acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94740 --- Comment #1 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org --- Reduced test case: struct __attribute__((scalar_storage_order("big-endian"))) { int a; int b[]; } c; int d; int e() { d = c.b[0]; }