This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Fix PR399955: rs6000 needs to handle SSA_NAMEs
- From: Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>
- To: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, eres at il dot ibm dot com
- Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:59:26 -0700
- Subject: Re: Fix PR399955: rs6000 needs to handle SSA_NAMEs
- References: <Pine.LNX.email@example.com>
- Reply-to: janis187 at us dot ibm dot com
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 19:48 +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> currently we get ICEs on powerpc when SDmode variables are involved,
> because the backend goes over the gimple instructions to detect the usage
> of that mode and allocate a stack slot. With SSA expand this can contain
> SSA_NAMEs which we need to look at too, not just VAR_DECLs.
> This patch was regstrapped on powerpc64-linux with the same configure
> options that Janis is using (so I can compare testresults posting with my
> The FAILs I now see are either preexisting (from
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-04/msg02785.html), are Richards
> ICEs with the type verifier where the vectorizer introduces invalid
> conversions, or are these ones:
> FAIL: gcc.dg/sms-8.c scan-rtl-dump-times sms "SMS succeeded" 1
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-8.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 2
> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/20050603-3.c scan-assembler-not inm
> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/405-dlmzb-strlen-1.c scan-assembler dlmzb\\\\.
> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/440-dlmzb-strlen-1.c scan-assembler dlmzb\\\\.
> FAIL: events output
> FAIL: 22_locale/codecvt/unshift/char/1.cc execution test
> sms-8 uses long long arithmetic on 32 bit, which involves setting
> SImode subregs of DImode regs, which SMS can't handle. No idea why it
> should have worked before.
The check that fails was added 2009-04-07 with r146838, so it probably
never passed for -m32. Revital, should the check on powerpc only be
> The other scan-asm and vector test are most
> probably changes exposed by the limited TER, but I haven't investigated in
> detail yet. 1.cc seems to fail also for others sometimes.
I haven't seen the 1.cc failure before on powerpc64-linux.
> no idea about
> the "events output" one.
This has failed intermittently for a long time.