On 09/07/2014 11:17 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> 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)();
> }
>
Oh, sorry, neither original nor the new one (with this patch) can
recognize the code above.
- The original one can recognize "void *(*)(void);"
- But can not recognize "void (*)(void);"
- Although new one (with this patch) also recognize "void *(*)(void);",
it causes inconsistency within "config/microblaze/microblaze.md".
And the original one also can recognize all below contents (only except
"void (*)(void), or void (*)(int)"):
- void **(*)(void);
- int *(*)(void);
- int (*)(void);
- int (*)(int);
> 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
