Ajit Agarwal <aagar...@linux.ibm.com> writes:
> Hello Richard:
>
> On 19/06/24 1:54 pm, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Ajit Agarwal <aagar...@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>>>> What happens if you leave the assert alone? When does it fire? Is it
>>>> still for uses in debug insns? If so, it's the fusion pass's
>>>> responsibility
>>>> to update those, as mentioned above. And it must update them before,
>>>> or at the same time as, it deletes the definition.
>>>>
>>>
>>> For debug insn I call reset_debug_use and now I dont see issues
>>> with debug insn and issues I see with non debug insn where
>>> def is there in old_defs and use has to be removed for the insn
>>> that we modify load with OO UNSPEC to generate lxvp.
>>
>> Can you walk me through it step-by-step? If you leave the assert
>> alone, when does it fire? What set of insn_changes are being made
>> when the assert fires? (Calling debug on the changes will show this.)
>> And what use does the assert fire on? (Again, calling debug on the use
>> will show this.)
>>
>
> (insn 660 735 739 50 (set (reg:OO 405 [ MEM[(_Float128 *)src_196] ])
> (unspec:OO [
> (mem:OO (reg/v/f:DI 197 [ base ]) [9 MEM[(_Float128
> *)src_196]+0 S16 A128])
> ] UNSPEC_LXVP)) 2188 {*movoo1}
> (nil))
>
> This is definition.
>
> (insn 661 659 662 50 (set (reg:TF 179 [ result$imag ])
> (plus:TF (reg:TF 179 [ result$imag ])
> (subreg:TF (reg:OO 405 [ MEM[(_Float128 *)src_196] ]) 0)))
> {addtf3}
>
> This is use.
>
> change has the above definition and the assert fires at the
> above use.
But can you call debug on the insn_change that contains the deleted def,
and call debug on the access_info that triggers the assert?
Thanks,
Richard
