Hi Pan:
LGTM.
Hi Jakub:
Is this OK for GCC 14 branch? it's fix ICE on valid code, thanks :)
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 3:40 PM <pan2...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> From: Pan Li <pan2...@intel.com>
>
> When we build with isl, there will be a ICE for graphite in both
> the c/c++ and fortran. The legitimize move cannot take care of
> below rtl.
>
> (set (subreg:DI (reg:TI 237) 8) (subreg:DI (const_poly_int:TI [4, 2]) 8))
>
> Then we will have ice similar to below:
>
> internal compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812.
>
> This patch would like to take care of the above rtl. Given the value of
> const_poly_int can hardly excceed the max of int64, we can simply
> consider the highest 8 bytes of TImode is zero and then set the dest
> to (const_int 0).
>
> The below test cases are fixed by this PATCH.
>
> C:
> FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/pr111878.c (internal compiler error: in
> extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/pr111878.c (test for excess errors)
>
> Fortran:
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/vect-pr40979.f90 -O (internal compiler
> error: in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr29832.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
> -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (internal
> compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr29581.f90 -O3 -g (test for excess
> errors)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr14741.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr29581.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
> -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (test for
> excess errors)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/vect-pr40979.f90 -O (test for excess
> errors)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/id-27.f90 -O (internal compiler error: in
> extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr29832.f90 -O3 -g (internal compiler
> error: in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr29832.f90 -O3 -g (test for excess
> errors)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/id-27.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr29832.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
> -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (test for
> excess errors)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr29581.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
> -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (internal
> compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr14741.f90 -O (internal compiler error:
> in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr29581.f90 -O3 -g (internal compiler
> error: in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2812)
>
> The below test suites are passed for this patch:
> * The rv64gcv fully regression test.
> * The rv64gc fully regression test.
>
> Try to write some RTL code for test but not works well according to
> existing test cases. Thus, take above as test cases. Please note
> graphite require the gcc build with isl.
>
> PR target/114885
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/riscv/riscv.cc (riscv_legitimize_subreg_const_poly_move): New
> func impl to take care of (const_int_poly:TI 8).
> (riscv_legitimize_move): Handle subreg is const_int_poly,
>
> Signed-off-by: Pan Li <pan2...@intel.com>
> ---
> gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> index 0519e0679ed..0f62b295b96 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> @@ -2786,6 +2786,45 @@ riscv_v_adjust_scalable_frame (rtx target, poly_int64
> offset, bool epilogue)
> REG_NOTES (insn) = dwarf;
> }
>
> +/* Take care below subreg const_poly_int move:
> +
> + 1. (set (subreg:DI (reg:TI 237) 8)
> + (subreg:DI (const_poly_int:TI [4, 2]) 8))
> + =>
> + (set (subreg:DI (reg:TI 237) 8)
> + (const_int 0)) */
> +
> +static bool
> +riscv_legitimize_subreg_const_poly_move (machine_mode mode, rtx dest, rtx
> src)
> +{
> + gcc_assert (SUBREG_P (src) && CONST_POLY_INT_P (SUBREG_REG (src)));
> + gcc_assert (SUBREG_BYTE (src).is_constant ());
> +
> + int byte_offset = SUBREG_BYTE (src).to_constant ();
> + rtx const_poly = SUBREG_REG (src);
> + machine_mode subreg_mode = GET_MODE (const_poly);
> +
> + if (subreg_mode != TImode) /* Only TImode is needed for now. */
> + return false;
> +
> + if (byte_offset == 8)
> + {
> + /* The const_poly_int cannot exceed int64, just set zero here. */
> + emit_move_insn (dest, CONST0_RTX (mode));
> + return true;
> + }
> +
> + /* The below transform will be covered in somewhere else.
> + Thus, ignore this here.
> + (set (subreg:DI (reg:TI 237) 0)
> + (subreg:DI (const_poly_int:TI [4, 2]) 0))
> + =>
> + (set (subreg:DI (reg:TI 237) 0)
> + (const_poly_int:DI [4, 2])) */
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> /* If (set DEST SRC) is not a valid move instruction, emit an equivalent
> sequence that is valid. */
>
> @@ -2839,6 +2878,11 @@ riscv_legitimize_move (machine_mode mode, rtx dest,
> rtx src)
> }
> return true;
> }
> +
> + if (SUBREG_P (src) && CONST_POLY_INT_P (SUBREG_REG (src))
> + && riscv_legitimize_subreg_const_poly_move (mode, dest, src))
> + return true;
> +
> /* Expand
> (set (reg:DI target) (subreg:DI (reg:V8QI reg) 0))
> Expand this data movement instead of simply forbid it since
> --
> 2.34.1
>
