On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 3:51 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:46:54PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > Can't you just describe the dataflow then, without an unspec? An unspec
> > > by definition does some (unspecified) operation on the data.
> >
> > Previously, it was
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 3:46 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:27:28PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 11:07 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > > > (unspec:DI [
> > > > > (reg:CC 17 flags)
> > > > > ] UNSPEC_PUSHFL)
> > > >
> > > > But that
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:46:54PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Can't you just describe the dataflow then, without an unspec? An unspec
> > by definition does some (unspecified) operation on the data.
>
> Previously, it was defined as:
>
> (define_insn "*pushfl2"
>[(set (match_operand:W 0
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:27:28PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 11:07 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > > (unspec:DI [
> > > > (reg:CC 17 flags)
> > > > ] UNSPEC_PUSHFL)
> > >
> > > But that is invalid RTL? The only valid use of a CC is written as
> > >
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 11:29 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:07:18PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:37 PM Segher Boessenkool
> > wrote:
> > > > but can be something else, such as the above noted
> > > >
> > > > (unspec:DI [
> > > >
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:07:18PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:37 PM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > > but can be something else, such as the above noted
> > >
> > > (unspec:DI [
> > > (reg:CC 17 flags)
> > > ] UNSPEC_PUSHFL)
> >
> > But that is invalid
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 11:07 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:37 PM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 10:04:32PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > The part we want to fix deals with the *user* of the CC register. It
> > > is not true
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:37 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 10:04:32PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > The part we want to fix deals with the *user* of the CC register. It
> > is not true that this is always COMPARISON_P, so EQ, NE, GE, LT, ...
> > in the form
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 10:04:32PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
[snip]
> The part we want to fix deals with the *user* of the CC register. It
> is not true that this is always COMPARISON_P, so EQ, NE, GE, LT, ...
> in the form of
>
> (LT:CCGC (reg:CCGC 17 flags) (const_int 0))
>
> but can be
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:04 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> The source code that deals with the *user* of the CC register assumes
> the former form, so it blindly tries to update the mode of the CC
> register inside LT comparison RTX (some other nearby source code even
> checks for (const_int 0) RTX).
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 6:39 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 10:55:12AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > This is
> > >
> > > 3236 /* Just replace the CC reg with a new mode. */
> > > 3237 SUBST (XEXP
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 12:22:04PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> As I understood find_single_use, it is returning RTX iff DEST is used
> only a single time in an insn sequence following INSN.
Connected by a log_link even, yeah.
> We can reject the combination without worries of multiple uses.
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:45:45AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> The question is, whether a NULL cc_use_loc (find_single_use returning
> NULL) means "there is no use" or it can mean "huh, don't know, maybe
> more than one, maybe I was too stupid to indentify the single use".
> The implementation
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:22:12AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > Undo the combination if *cc_use_loc is not COMPARISON_P.
Why, anyway? COMPARISON_P means things like LE. It does not even
include actual RTX COMPARE.
Segher
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 10:55:12AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > This is
> >
> > 3236 /* Just replace the CC reg with a new mode. */
> > 3237 SUBST (XEXP (*cc_use_loc, 0), newpat_dest);
> > 3238 undobuf.other_insn
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 12:11 PM Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:11:35AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > > Since you CCed me - looking at the code I wonder why we fatally fail.
> > > > The following might also fix the issue and
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:11:35AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > Since you CCed me - looking at the code I wonder why we fatally fail.
> > > The following might also fix the issue and preserve more of the
> > > rest of the flow of the function.
> > >
>
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:56?AM Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
> > > The compiler, configured with --enable-checking=yes,rtl,extra ICEs with:
> > >
> > > internal compiler error: RTL check: expected elt 0 type 'e'
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 11:37 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:11:35AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > Since you CCed me - looking at the code I wonder why we fatally fail.
> > > The following might also fix the issue and preserve more of the
> > > rest of the flow of the
On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 11:11:35AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Since you CCed me - looking at the code I wonder why we fatally fail.
> > The following might also fix the issue and preserve more of the
> > rest of the flow of the function.
> >
> > If that works I'd prefer it. But I'll defer
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:56 AM Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> > The compiler, configured with --enable-checking=yes,rtl,extra ICEs with:
> >
> > internal compiler error: RTL check: expected elt 0 type 'e' or 'u',
> > have 'E' (rtx unspec) in try_combine, at
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> The compiler, configured with --enable-checking=yes,rtl,extra ICEs with:
>
> internal compiler error: RTL check: expected elt 0 type 'e' or 'u',
> have 'E' (rtx unspec) in try_combine, at combine.cc:3237
>
> This is
>
> 3236 /* Just replace
The compiler, configured with --enable-checking=yes,rtl,extra ICEs with:
internal compiler error: RTL check: expected elt 0 type 'e' or 'u',
have 'E' (rtx unspec) in try_combine, at combine.cc:3237
This is
3236 /* Just replace the CC reg with a new mode. */
3237 SUBST
23 matches
Mail list logo
