Hi Bernd,
On 8/29/19 10:26 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
On 8/29/19 11:08 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 at 10:58, Kyrill Tkachov
<kyrylo.tkac...@foss.arm.com> wrote:
Hi Bernd,
On 8/28/19 10:36 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
On 8/28/19 2:07 PM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
This patch causes an ICE when building libgcc's unwind-arm.o
when configuring GCC:
--target arm-none-linux-gnueabihf --with-mode thumb --with-cpu
cortex-a15 --with-fpu neon-vfpv4:
The build works for the same target, but --with-mode arm --with-cpu
cortex a9 --with-fpu vfp
In file included from
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/libgcc/config/arm/unwind-arm.c:144:
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/libgcc/unwind-arm-common.inc:
In function 'get_eit_entry':
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/libgcc/unwind-arm-common.inc:245:29:
warning: cast discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type
[-Wcast-qual]
245 | ucbp->pr_cache.ehtp = (_Unwind_EHT_Header *)&eitp->content;
| ^
during RTL pass: expand
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/libgcc/unwind-arm-common.inc:
In function 'unwind_phase2_forced':
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/libgcc/unwind-arm-common.inc:319:18:
internal compiler error: in gen_movdi, at config/arm/arm.md:5235
319 | saved_vrs.core = entry_vrs->core;
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0x126530f gen_movdi(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/config/arm/arm.md:5235
0x896d92 insn_gen_fn::operator()(rtx_def*, rtx_def*) const
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/recog.h:318
0x896d92 emit_move_insn_1(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/expr.c:3694
0x897083 emit_move_insn(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/expr.c:3790
0xfc25d6 gen_cpymem_ldrd_strd(rtx_def**)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/config/arm/arm.c:14582
0x126a1f1 gen_cpymemqi(rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/config/arm/arm.md:6688
0xb0bc08 maybe_expand_insn(insn_code, unsigned int, expand_operand*)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/optabs.c:7440
0x89ba1e emit_block_move_via_cpymem
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/expr.c:1808
0x89ba1e emit_block_move_hints(rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*,
block_op_methods, unsigned int, long, unsigned long, unsigned long,
unsigned long, bool, bool*)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/expr.c:1627
0x89c383 emit_block_move(rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*, block_op_methods)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/expr.c:1667
0x89fb4e store_expr(tree_node*, rtx_def*, int, bool, bool)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/expr.c:5845
0x88c1f9 store_field
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/expr.c:7149
0x8a0c22 expand_assignment(tree_node*, tree_node*, bool)
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/expr.c:5304
0x761964 expand_gimple_stmt_1
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/cfgexpand.c:3779
0x761964 expand_gimple_stmt
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/cfgexpand.c:3875
0x768583 expand_gimple_basic_block
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/cfgexpand.c:5915
0x76abc6 execute
/tmp/6852788_4.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/cfgexpand.c:6538
Christophe
Okay, sorry for the breakage.
What is happening in gen_cpymem_ldrd_strd is of course against the rules:
It uses emit_move_insn on only 4-byte aligned DI-mode memory operands.
I have a patch for this, which is able to fix the libgcc build on a cross, but
have no
possibility to bootstrap the affected target.
Could you please help?
Well it's good that the sanitisation is catching the bugs!
Yes, more than expected, though ;)
Bootstrapping this patch I get another assert with the backtrace:
Thanks for the additional testing, Kyrill!
FWIW, my original report was with a failure to just build GCC for
cortex-a15. I later got the reports of testing cross-toolchains, and
saw other problems on cortex-a9 for instance.
But I guess, you have noticed them with your bootstrap?
on arm-linux-gnueabi
gcc.target/arm/aapcs/align4.c (internal compiler error)
gcc.target/arm/aapcs/align_rec4.c (internal compiler error)
This appears to be yet unknown middle-end bug (not fixed by current patch)
$ arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc align4.c
during RTL pass: expand
In file included from align4.c:22:
align4.c: In function 'testfunc':
abitest.h:73:42: internal compiler error: in gen_movv2si, at
config/arm/vec-common.md:30
73 | #define LAST_ARG(type,val,offset) { type __x = val; if (memcmp(&__x,
stack+offset, sizeof(type)) != 0) abort(); }
| ^~~
abitest.h:74:30: note: in expansion of macro 'LAST_ARG'
74 | #define ARG(type,val,offset) LAST_ARG(type, val, offset)
| ^~~~~~~~
align4.c:26:3: note: in expansion of macro 'ARG'
26 | ARG (unalignedvec, a, R2)
| ^~~
0x7bb33c gen_movv2si(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/config/arm/vec-common.md:30
0xa4a807 insn_gen_fn::operator()(rtx_def*, rtx_def*) const
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/recog.h:318
0xa4a807 emit_move_insn_1(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/expr.c:3694
0xa4ab94 emit_move_insn(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/expr.c:3790
0xa522bf store_expr(tree_node*, rtx_def*, int, bool, bool)
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/expr.c:5855
0xa52bfd expand_assignment(tree_node*, tree_node*, bool)
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/expr.c:5441
0xa52bfd expand_assignment(tree_node*, tree_node*, bool)
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/expr.c:4982
0x934adf expand_gimple_stmt_1
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/cfgexpand.c:3777
0x934adf expand_gimple_stmt
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/cfgexpand.c:3875
0x93a451 expand_gimple_basic_block
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/cfgexpand.c:5915
0x93c1b6 execute
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/cfgexpand.c:6538
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
(with -march=armv5t: gcc.dg/pr83930.c (internal compiler error))
possibly fixed by latest patch.
on arm-linux-gnueabihf, in addition to align4/align_rec4:
--with-cpu cortex-a9
--with-fpu neon-fp16
gcc.c-torture/execute/pr37573.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (internal
compiler error)
gcc.c-torture/execute/pr37573.c -O3 -g (internal compiler error)
gcc.dg/vect/fast-math-pr35982.c (internal compiler error)
gcc.dg/vect/pr55857-1.c (internal compiler error)
gcc.dg/vect/pr55857-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error)
gcc.dg/vect/pr55857-2.c (internal compiler error)
gcc.dg/vect/pr55857-2.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error)
gcc.dg/vect/pr57558-2.c (internal compiler error)
gcc.dg/vect/pr57558-2.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error)
and even more with other configs
(http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc/trunk/274986/report-build-info.html
may help)
Christophe
$BUILD/arm-none-linux-gnueabihf/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/concurrence.h:
In function '(static initializers for
$SRC/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_alloc.cc)':
$BUILD/arm-none-linux-gnueabihf/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/concurrence.h:129:5:
internal compiler error: in gen_movv8qi, at config/arm/vec-common.md:29
129 | {
| ^
0x14155cb gen_movv8qi(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
$SRC/gcc/config/arm/vec-common.md:29
0x96bb89 insn_gen_fn::operator()(rtx_def*, rtx_def*) const
$SRC/gcc/recog.h:318
0x94bc95 emit_move_insn_1(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
$SRC/gcc/expr.c:3694
0x94c05b emit_move_insn(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
$SRC/gcc/expr.c:3790
0x10d5ee5 arm_block_set_aligned_vect
$SRC/gcc/config/arm/arm.c:30204
0x10d6b37 arm_block_set_vect
$SRC/gcc/config/arm/arm.c:30428
0x10d6caf arm_gen_setmem(rtx_def**)
$SRC/gcc/config/arm/arm.c:30458
0x140d7ed gen_setmemsi(rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
$SRC/gcc/config/arm/arm.md:6687
0xbf0e87 insn_gen_fn::operator()(rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
const
$SRC/gcc/recog.h:320
0xbf0999 maybe_gen_insn(insn_code, unsigned int, expand_operand*)
$SRC/gcc/optabs.c:7409
0xbf0b87 maybe_expand_insn(insn_code, unsigned int, expand_operand*)
$SRC/gcc/optabs.c:7440
0x94a709 set_storage_via_setmem(rtx_def*, rtx_def*, rtx_def*, unsigned
int, unsigned int, long long, unsigned long long, unsigned long long,
unsigned long long)
$SRC/gcc/expr.c:3168
0x94a059 clear_storage_hints(rtx_def*, rtx_def*, block_op_methods,
unsigned int, long long, unsigned long long, unsigned long long,
unsigned long long)
$SRC/gcc/expr.c:3037
0x94a137 clear_storage(rtx_def*, rtx_def*, block_op_methods)
$SRC/gcc/expr.c:3058
0x9537c5 store_constructor
$SRC/gcc/expr.c:6333
0x957227 store_field
$SRC/gcc/expr.c:7145
0x94fde1 expand_assignment(tree_node*, tree_node*, bool)
$SRC/gcc/expr.c:5301
0x815e25 expand_gimple_stmt_1
$SRC/gcc/cfgexpand.c:3777
0x81611d expand_gimple_stmt
$SRC/gcc/cfgexpand.c:3875
0x81cd61 expand_gimple_basic_block
$SRC/gcc/cfgexpand.c:5915
Looks to me like arm_gen_setmem needs similar fixes to gen_cpymem_ldrd_strd?
Yes, indeed, see attached patch.
This seems to fix the bootstrap, but at least one other error remains,
however I think those do hopefully not break the boot-strap and can be
fixed with follow-up patches.
Christophe can you please track the remaining regressions, that would be
very helpful.
Attached is an updated patch version which should un-break the bootstrap issues.
Is it OK for trunk?
Yes, that fixes the bootstrap and testing looks ok, modulo the
regressions Christophe listed.
Ok with one change...
+(define_insn "unaligned_storev8qi"
+ [(set (match_operand:V8QI 0 "memory_operand" "=Un")
+ (unspec:V8QI [(match_operand:V8QI 1 "s_register_operand" "w")]
+ UNSPEC_UNALIGNED_STORE))]
+ "TARGET_NEON"
+ "*
+ return output_move_neon (operands);
+ "
+ [(set_attr "length" "4")
+ (set_attr "type" "neon_store1_1reg")])
No need to specify the "length" here as it's 4 by default.
Thanks,
Kyrill
Thanks
Bernd.
