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 <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)(); > } >
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