qiaopeixin <qiaopei...@huawei.com> writes:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Thanks for the review and explanation.
>
> The previous fix adding if condition of TARGET_FLOAT does crash glibc-2.29.
>
> I checked the past log of writing the function aarch64_init_cumulative_args,
> and did not find the reason why Alan Lawrence added TREE_PUBLIC (fndecl) as
> one condition for entering the function type check. Maybe Alan could clarify?
> I tried to delete TREE_PUBLIC (fndecl), which turns out could solve both the
> glibc problem and the previous ICE problem. A new fix is made as following,
> passed bootstrap and deja test. I believe this fix is reasonable, since the
> function type should be checked no matter if it has external linkage or not.
>
> The function aarch64_init_cumulative_args checks the function types and
> should catch the error that "-mgeneral-regs-only" is incompatible with the
> use of SIMD/FP registers. In the test case on PR96479, the function myfunc2
> returns one vector of 4 integers, while it is defined static type.
> TREE_PUBLIC (fndecl) is set as false and it prevents from entering if
> statement and checking function types. I delete "TREE_PUBLIC (fndecl)" so
> that gcc can catch the error through the function
> aarch64_init_cumulative_args now. The ICE on PR96479 can report the
> diagnostic error with this fix. The patch for the fix is attached as
> following:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> index b7f5bc76f1b..9ce83dce131 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> +++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> @@ -6017,7 +6017,7 @@ aarch64_init_cumulative_args (CUMULATIVE_ARGS *pcum,
>
> if (!silent_p
> && !TARGET_FLOAT
> - && fndecl && TREE_PUBLIC (fndecl)
> + && fndecl
> && fntype && fntype != error_mark_node)
> {
> const_tree type = TREE_TYPE (fntype);
I think the fndecl test is problematic too though. E.g. consider:
typedef int v4si __attribute__((vector_size(16)));
v4si (*foo) ();
void f (v4si *ptr) { *ptr = foo (); }
which ICEs for me even with the above.
I suggest we just remove the line and see whether anything breaks.
Thanks,
Richard
