> On 8/13/14 23:10, Michael Eager wrote:
>> On 07/06/14 03:26, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>
>>> * microblaze/mocroblaze.md (call_value_intern): Use 'SI' instead of
>>> 'VOID' for operand 1, just like 'call_internal1' has done.
>>>
>>> The related warning:
>>>
>>> ../../gcc/gcc/config/microblaze/microblaze.md:2172: warning: operand 1
>>> missing mode?
>>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5...@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> gcc/config/microblaze/microblaze.md | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/config/microblaze/microblaze.md
>>> b/gcc/config/microblaze/microblaze.md
>>> index 2bd5d72..9580221 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/config/microblaze/microblaze.md
>>> +++ b/gcc/config/microblaze/microblaze.md
>>> @@ -2171,7 +2171,7 @@
>>>
>>> (define_insn "call_value_intern"
>>> [(set (match_operand:VOID 0 "register_operand" "=d")
>>> - (call (mem (match_operand:VOID 1 "call_insn_operand" "ri"))
>>> + (call (mem (match_operand:SI 1 "call_insn_operand" "ri"))
>>> (match_operand:SI 2 "" "i")))
>>> (clobber (match_operand:SI 3 "register_operand" "=d"))]
>>> ""
>>
>> This patch causes a test suite regression:
>>
>> Executing on host: mb-gcc -fno-diagnostics-show-caret
>> -fdiagnostics-color=never -O0 -w -c -mno-xl-soft-mul -mxl-barrel-shift
>> -mcpu=v6.00.a -o calls.o testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/calls.c
>> (timeout = 60)
>> pid is 24832 -24832
>> testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/calls.c: In function 'f1':
>> testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/calls.c:6:1: error: unrecognizable insn:
>> (call_insn 5 2 8 2 (parallel [
>> (set (reg:SI 3 r3)
>> (call (mem:SI (const_int 0 [0]) [0 MEM[(void * (*<T29e>)
>> (void))0B] S4 A32])
>> (const_int 24 [0x18])))
>> (clobber (reg:SI 15 r15))
>> ]) testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/calls.c:5 -1
>> (nil)
>> (nil))
>> testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/calls.c:6:1: internal compiler error: in
>> extract_insn, at recog.c:2204
>> 0x983018 _fatal_insn(char const*, rtx_def const*, char const*, int, char
>> const*)
>> /store/Xilinx/repo/fsf/gcc/gcc/rtl-error.c:109
>> 0x983041 _fatal_insn_not_found(rtx_def const*, char const*, int, char const*)
>> /store/Xilinx/repo/fsf/gcc/gcc/rtl-error.c:117
>> 0x9539cd extract_insn(rtx_def*)
>> /store/Xilinx/repo/fsf/gcc/gcc/recog.c:2204
>> 0x7a5b59 instantiate_virtual_regs_in_insn
>> /store/Xilinx/repo/fsf/gcc/gcc/function.c:1561
>> 0x7aaa78 instantiate_virtual_regs
>> /store/Xilinx/repo/fsf/gcc/gcc/function.c:1932
>>
It is really this patch to cause this issue. After add this patch, it
will be fail for compiling the below C code:
typedef void (*T)(void);
f1 ()
{
((T) 0)();
}
And I guess, the original compiling warning is still useful for us: for
the almost same code, the original gcc (no this patch) also report the
same error:
f1 ()
{
((void (*)(void))0)();
}
The related command is "./cc1 call.c -o /tmp/test.s" ('call.c' has the
contents above).
And I shall continue analysing it (I shall try to finish within this
month). And also welcome any ideas, suggestions or completions.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Open share and attitude like air water and life which God blessed
