For tcpsock_test.go in libgo tests,

commit aba3b9d3a48a0703fd565f7c5f0caf604f59970b
Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri May 9 07:17:07 2025 +0800

    x86: Extend the remove_redundant_vector pass

added an instruction:

(insn 501 101 102 21 (set (reg:V2DI 234)
        (vec_duplicate:V2DI (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ]))) "tcpsock_test.go":691:12 disc
rim 1 -1
     (nil))

after

(insn 101 100 501 21 (set (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ])
        (mem:DI (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ]) [5 *_45+0 S8 A64])) "tcpsock_test.go":691
:12 discrim 1 99 {*movdi_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ])
        (expr_list:REG_EH_REGION (const_int 1 [0x1])
            (nil))))

which resulted in

(insn 101 100 501 21 (set (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ])
        (mem:DI (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ]) [5 *_45+0 S8 A64])) "tcpsock_test.go":691
:12 discrim 1 99 {*movdi_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ])
        (expr_list:REG_EH_REGION (const_int 1 [0x1])
            (nil))))
(insn 501 101 102 21 (set (reg:V2DI 234)
        (vec_duplicate:V2DI (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ]))) "tcpsock_test.go":691:12 disc
rim 1 -1
     (nil))

and caused:

tcpsock_test.go: In function 'net.TestTCPBig..func2':
tcpsock_test.go:684:28: error: in basic block 21:
  684 |                         go func() {
      |                            ^
tcpsock_test.go:684:28: error: flow control insn inside a basic block
(insn 101 100 501 21 (set (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ])
        (mem:DI (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ]) [5 *_45+0 S8 A64])) "tcpsock_test.go":691
:12 discrim 1 99 {*movdi_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ])
        (expr_list:REG_EH_REGION (const_int 1 [0x1])
            (nil))))
during RTL pass: rrvl
tcpsock_test.go:684:28: internal compiler error: in rtl_verify_bb_insns, at cfgr
tl.cc:2834

Copy the REG_EH_REGION note to the newly added instruction and split the
block after the previous instruction.

PR target/120816
* config/i386/i386-features.cc (remove_redundant_vector_load):
Handle REG_EH_REGION note in DEF_INSN.

OK for master?

-- 
H.J.
From 907f4f375a81f315ba8b827f5014e16345ea441d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.to...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 12:50:53 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] x86: Handle REG_EH_REGION note in DEF_INSN

For tcpsock_test.go in libgo tests,

commit aba3b9d3a48a0703fd565f7c5f0caf604f59970b
Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri May 9 07:17:07 2025 +0800

    x86: Extend the remove_redundant_vector pass

added an instruction:

(insn 501 101 102 21 (set (reg:V2DI 234)
        (vec_duplicate:V2DI (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ]))) "tcpsock_test.go":691:12 discrim 1 -1
     (nil))

after

(insn 101 100 501 21 (set (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ])
        (mem:DI (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ]) [5 *_45+0 S8 A64])) "tcpsock_test.go":691:12 discrim 1 99 {*movdi_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ])
        (expr_list:REG_EH_REGION (const_int 1 [0x1])
            (nil))))

which resulted in

(insn 101 100 501 21 (set (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ])
        (mem:DI (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ]) [5 *_45+0 S8 A64])) "tcpsock_test.go":691:12 discrim 1 99 {*movdi_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ])
        (expr_list:REG_EH_REGION (const_int 1 [0x1])
            (nil))))
(insn 501 101 102 21 (set (reg:V2DI 234)
        (vec_duplicate:V2DI (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ]))) "tcpsock_test.go":691:12 discrim 1 -1
     (nil))

and caused:

tcpsock_test.go: In function 'net.TestTCPBig..func2':
tcpsock_test.go:684:28: error: in basic block 21:
  684 |                         go func() {
      |                            ^
tcpsock_test.go:684:28: error: flow control insn inside a basic block
(insn 101 100 501 21 (set (reg:DI 111 [ _46 ])
        (mem:DI (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ]) [5 *_45+0 S8 A64])) "tcpsock_test.go":691:12 discrim 1 99 {*movdi_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:DI 110 [ _45 ])
        (expr_list:REG_EH_REGION (const_int 1 [0x1])
            (nil))))
during RTL pass: rrvl
tcpsock_test.go:684:28: internal compiler error: in rtl_verify_bb_insns, at cfgrtl.cc:2834

Copy the REG_EH_REGION note to the newly added instruction and split the
block after the previous instruction.

	PR target/120816
	* config/i386/i386-features.cc (remove_redundant_vector_load):
	Handle REG_EH_REGION note in DEF_INSN.

Signed-off-by: H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com>
---
 gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)

diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
index be2ce3103dd..d942bf08b56 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
@@ -3820,6 +3820,8 @@ remove_redundant_vector_load (void)
 
   if (replaced)
     {
+      auto_vec<rtx_insn *> control_flow_insns;
+
       /* (Re-)discover loops so that bb->loop_father can be used in the
 	 analysis below.  */
       calculate_dominance_info (CDI_DOMINATORS);
@@ -3835,6 +3837,20 @@ remove_redundant_vector_load (void)
 		rtx set = gen_rtx_SET (load->broadcast_reg,
 				       load->broadcast_source);
 		insn = emit_insn_after (set, load->def_insn);
+
+		if (cfun->can_throw_non_call_exceptions)
+		  {
+		    /* Handle REG_EH_REGION note in DEF_INSN.  */
+		    rtx note = find_reg_note (load->def_insn,
+					      REG_EH_REGION, nullptr);
+		    if (note)
+		      {
+			control_flow_insns.safe_push (load->def_insn);
+			add_reg_note (insn, REG_EH_REGION,
+				      XEXP (note, 0));
+		      }
+		  }
+
 		if (dump_file)
 		  {
 		    fprintf (dump_file, "\nAdd:\n\n");
@@ -3855,6 +3871,22 @@ remove_redundant_vector_load (void)
 
       loop_optimizer_finalize ();
 
+      if (!control_flow_insns.is_empty ())
+	{
+	  free_dominance_info (CDI_DOMINATORS);
+
+	  FOR_EACH_VEC_ELT (control_flow_insns, i, insn)
+	    if (control_flow_insn_p (insn))
+	      {
+		/* Split the block after insn.  There will be a fallthru
+		   edge, which is OK so we keep it.  We have to create
+		   the exception edges ourselves.  */
+		bb = BLOCK_FOR_INSN (insn);
+		split_block (bb, insn);
+		rtl_make_eh_edge (NULL, bb, BB_END (bb));
+	      }
+	}
+
       df_process_deferred_rescans ();
     }
 
-- 
2.49.0

Reply via email to