vectorizable_call stubs out the original scalar statement with
a dummy assignment to the same lhs, so that we don't leave any bogus
scalar calls around. If the call is actually a pattern statement,
the code rightly took the lhs of the original bb statement:
if (is_pattern_stmt_p (stmt_info))
lhs = gimple_call_lhs (STMT_VINFO_RELATED_STMT (stmt_info));
else
lhs = gimple_call_lhs (stmt);
But it then associated the new statement with the stmt_vec_info of the
pattern statement rather than the bb statement, which meant we had two
stmt_vec_infos assigning to the same lhs. This seems to be latent at
the moment but caused problems further into the series.
2018-06-20 Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
gcc/
* tree-vect-stmts.c (vectorizable_call): Make sure that we
use the stmt_vec_info of the original bb statement for the
new zero assignment, even if the call is part of a pattern.
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk@261786
138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-
82ee72b054a4
+2018-06-20 Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
+
+ * tree-vect-stmts.c (vectorizable_call): Make sure that we
+ use the stmt_vec_info of the original bb statement for the
+ new zero assignment, even if the call is part of a pattern.
+
2018-06-20 Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
* tree-vectorizer.h (_stmt_vec_info): Note above pattern_def_seq
type = TREE_TYPE (scalar_dest);
if (is_pattern_stmt_p (stmt_info))
- lhs = gimple_call_lhs (STMT_VINFO_RELATED_STMT (stmt_info));
- else
- lhs = gimple_call_lhs (stmt);
+ stmt_info = vinfo_for_stmt (STMT_VINFO_RELATED_STMT (stmt_info));
+ lhs = gimple_get_lhs (stmt_info->stmt);
new_stmt = gimple_build_assign (lhs, build_zero_cst (type));
set_vinfo_for_stmt (new_stmt, stmt_info);
- set_vinfo_for_stmt (stmt, NULL);
+ set_vinfo_for_stmt (stmt_info->stmt, NULL);
STMT_VINFO_STMT (stmt_info) = new_stmt;
gsi_replace (gsi, new_stmt, false);