This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix ICEs in simplify_immed_subreg on OImode/XImode subregs (PR target/63910)
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:08:18 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ICEs in simplify_immed_subreg on OImode/XImode subregs (PR target/63910)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20141118215235 dot GP1745 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <BEE405EA-D02E-4A26-A06C-929AC38F7C19 at comcast dot net> <20141118234206 dot GX1745 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <FC3AAD1B-71F3-403B-89C1-1C6A4E8FA957 at comcast dot net>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 04:34:12PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2014, at 3:42 PM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> > No, I'm not touching tmp array at all in that case, only look at vp
> > individual bytes. Either they are all 0, or all 0xff, or I return NULL.
>
> Oh, sorry, I misread where the break; in your code was going. I might have been misled by:
>
> > - gcc_assert (GET_MODE_PRECISION (outer_submode)
> > - <= MAX_BITSIZE_MODE_ANY_INT);
>
> in your patch. You donât need that anymore, do you? If not, can you remove this part.
I thought the assert is unnecessary given the condition just a few lines
above it. But can keep it, perhaps gcc_checking_assert would be enough, and
hopefully compiler optimizes it away completely.
>
> The rest looks like normal rtl/vector code, I donât see anything wrong with it.
Jakub