Hi!
I've created a self-contained testcase for a powerpc64{,le}
wrong-code introduced (at least for powerpc64le) with r256656
and just later found it was already fixed with r260329.
The SLP vectorized:
+ w.l = x.l;
+ w.u = x.u;
was actually swapping it, so acting as:
w.u = x.l;
w.l = x.u;
instead. As the testcase is sufficiently different from PR85698
testcase, I've committed this one too to trunk.
2018-07-12 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
* gcc.dg/torture/20180712-1.c: New test.
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/20180712-1.c.jj 2018-07-12
13:14:46.513068757 +0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/20180712-1.c 2018-07-12 13:14:07.851035363
+0200
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-additional-options "-fstack-protector" { target fstack_protector } } */
+/* { dg-additional-options "-fPIC" { target fpic } } */
+
+struct S { int *l, *u; };
+int a[3];
+
+__attribute__((noipa)) struct S
+foo (void)
+{
+ int *p = a, *q = a + 1;
+ struct S s;
+ asm volatile ("" : "+g" (p), "+g" (q) : : "memory");
+ s.l = p;
+ s.u = q;
+ a[0]++;
+ return s;
+}
+
+__attribute__((noipa)) void
+bar (struct S *x)
+{
+ asm volatile ("" : : "g" (x) : "memory");
+ if (x->l != a || x->u != a + 1)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+ a[1]++;
+}
+
+__attribute__((noipa)) int
+baz (int *x, int *y)
+{
+ int r = -1;
+ asm volatile ("" : "+g" (r) : "g" (x), "g" (y) : "memory");
+ a[2]++;
+ return r;
+}
+
+__attribute__((noipa)) void
+quux (void)
+{
+ asm volatile ("" : : : "memory");
+}
+
+__attribute__((noipa)) void
+qux (void)
+{
+ struct S v = foo ();
+ struct S w;
+ struct S x = foo ();
+ int y = 0;
+
+ w.l = x.l;
+ w.u = x.u;
+ if (baz (x.l, v.l) > 0)
+ {
+ w.l = v.l;
+ y = 1;
+ quux ();
+ }
+ if (baz (x.u, v.u) < 0)
+ {
+ w.u = v.u;
+ y = 1;
+ }
+ if (y)
+ bar (&w);
+}
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ qux ();
+ if (a[0] != 2 || a[1] != 1 || a[2] != 2)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+ return 0;
+}
Jakub
