From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 6B81B386187B; Tue,  8 Jun 2021 09:14:33 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6B81B386187B
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/100960] var-tracking: parameter location in subregister
 not tracked
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 09:14:33 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-100960-4-cEm2KKOLan@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-100960-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-100960-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 09:14:33 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100960

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We have two different VALUEs here,
(value/u:SI 5:5 @0x4a99810/0x4a402e0)
 locs:
  from insn 1 (value/u:SI 6:261 @0x4a99828/0x4a40310)
  from insn 1 (entry_value:SI (reg:SI 2 %r2 [ x ]))
  from insn 1 (reg:SI 2 %r2 [ x ])
 no addrs
and
(value/u:DI 15:15 @0x4a99900/0x4a404c0)
 locs:
  from insn 17 (reg:DI 12 %r12 [63])
  from insn 17 (reg:DI 2 %r2 [ x+-4 ])
 no addrs
and cselib doesn't record that when insn 17 copies the 15:15 value to a new
location it effectively copies also the 5:5 value which is present in its l=
ow
bits.
Maybe it would be better to record among the locs of 5:5 that it is equival=
ent
to
lowpart subreg of (value:DI 15:15), perhaps at the point where the value 15=
:15
is created or so?=