https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118950
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #5)
> Yeah, the original statement is recognized as a mask conversion pattern:
>
> pr118950.c:9:21: note: vect_recog_mask_conversion_pattern: detected: _152
> = .MASK_LOAD (_230, 8B, _229, 0);
> pr118950.c:9:21: note: mask_conversion pattern recognized: patt_355 =
> .MASK_LOAD (_230, 8B, patt_54, 0);
>
> but also as a scatter/gather:
>
> pr118950.c:9:21: note: gather/scatter pattern: detected: _152 = .MASK_LOAD
> (_230, 8B, _229, 0);
> pr118950.c:9:21: note: gather_scatter pattern recognized: patt_375 =
> .MASK_LEN_GATHER_LOAD ((sizetype) _215 + 20, _85, 1, 0, _229, 0);
>
> The type of _152 is _Bool but patt_375's type is unsigned char. With
> unsigned char the presence of padding bits is not obvious and we should have
> looked at _152's type.
I suppose
tree load_lhs = vect_recog_temp_ssa_var (gs_info.element_type, NULL);
gimple_call_set_lhs (pattern_stmt, load_lhs);
is wrong then and confuses bool patterns? vect_recog_mask_conversion_pattern
simply uses
lhs = vect_recog_temp_ssa_var (TREE_TYPE (lhs), NULL);
gimple_call_set_lhs (pattern_stmt, lhs);
so the original LHS type.
