From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22752 invoked by alias); 4 Jul 2007 22:11:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 22468 invoked by uid 48); 4 Jul 2007 22:11:38 -0000 Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 22:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070704221138.22467.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/24609] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 regression] Same value duplicated in two different registers In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg00583.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-04 22:11 ------- For foo4.c > SCCVN says j_3 value numbers to i_2 (VH.3) But that is really PR 28868. The orginal issue here I think is fixed because we now use unsigned int for the addition. The IR looks like: : d = 2; prephitmp.39 = 1; goto ; : d = 1; prephitmp.39 = 0; : MEM[base: a, index: ivtmp.49, step: 4, offset: 4294967292] = d; D.2029 = bar ((short int *) ivtmp.52, (int) (short int) *(pretmp.36 + prephitmp.39), d); Which looks good as there is no duplicated value. Note the offset of -4 is a different and already known issue. Ian do you think this should no longer be a 4.3 Regression or should we even not PRE "PHI<1,2> - 1" ? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24609