Hi!

In PR65321 I've added lower_subreg call on the last argument of ASHIFT, but
as the following testcase shows, use_narrower_mode_test has not been updated
correspondingly to verify lower_subreg will actually work.
On the testcase validate_subreg actually is happy about it, but because op1
is already a (subreg:SI (reg:V32HI ) 48) and simplify_subreg fails, it fails
anyway.

Fixed thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for
trunk?

2018-06-20  Jakub Jelinek  <ja...@redhat.com>

        PR debug/86194
        * var-tracking.c (use_narrower_mode_test): Check if shift amount can
        be narrowed.

        * gcc.target/i386/pr86194.c: New test.

--- gcc/var-tracking.c.jj       2018-06-13 10:05:53.146127176 +0200
+++ gcc/var-tracking.c  2018-06-20 11:06:29.045456044 +0200
@@ -964,6 +964,24 @@ use_narrower_mode_test (rtx x, const_rtx
          case MULT:
            break;
          case ASHIFT:
+           if (GET_MODE (XEXP (x, 1)) != VOIDmode)
+             {
+               enum machine_mode mode = GET_MODE (subreg);
+               rtx op1 = XEXP (x, 1);
+               enum machine_mode op1_mode = GET_MODE (op1);
+               if (GET_MODE_PRECISION (as_a <scalar_int_mode> (mode))
+                   < GET_MODE_PRECISION (as_a <scalar_int_mode> (op1_mode)))
+                 {
+                   poly_uint64 byte = subreg_lowpart_offset (mode, op1_mode);
+                   if (GET_CODE (op1) == SUBREG || GET_CODE (op1) == CONCAT)
+                     {
+                       if (!simplify_subreg (mode, op1, op1_mode, byte))
+                         return false;
+                     }
+                   else if (!validate_subreg (mode, op1_mode, op1, byte))
+                     return false;
+                 }
+             }
            iter.substitute (XEXP (x, 0));
            break;
          default:
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr86194.c.jj  2018-06-20 11:12:46.801031294 
+0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr86194.c     2018-06-20 11:08:56.508680601 
+0200
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+/* PR debug/86194 */
+/* { dg-do compile { target int128 } } */
+/* { dg-options "-O -g -mavx512bw" } */
+
+typedef unsigned U __attribute__ ((vector_size (64)));
+typedef unsigned long V __attribute__ ((vector_size (64)));
+typedef unsigned __int128 W __attribute__ ((vector_size (64)));
+
+U u;
+
+W
+bar (W w)
+{
+  U k = u;
+  w <<= (W)(U) { 5, 3, 3, 0, 7, 3, 1, 3, k[7] };
+  k += (U) { -(char)w[3] } != k;
+  return (W)k + w;
+}
+
+void
+foo (void)
+{
+  u = (U){ bar ((W)(V) { 0, ~0, 0, 0, 0, 0, ~0 })[0] };
+}

        Jakub

Reply via email to