Hello Richard:
On 19/06/24 2:40 pm, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> 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?
>
I am afraid I am not getting what exactly you meant here.
> Thanks,
> Richard
Thanks & Regards
Ajit
