* [Bug tree-optimization/101260] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
@ 2021-06-29 23:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-30 6:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (19 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-29 23:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I thought r12-145 was a missed-optimization fix and such generally undesirable
to backport, plus it introduced PR100492 and PR101009 regressions.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/101260] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
2021-06-29 23:08 ` [Bug tree-optimization/101260] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-30 6:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-30 7:41 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (18 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-30 6:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2021-06-30
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yeah, that wasn't a fix in any sense so the issue is likely still latent. Note
there were some store-motion fixes that are not yet backported.
Btw, what options do you see the run-fail with? Does it work fine with GCC 10?
I fear the failure needs more analysis to pin-point the root cause first.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/101260] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
2021-06-29 23:08 ` [Bug tree-optimization/101260] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-30 6:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-30 7:41 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
2021-06-30 7:58 ` [Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (17 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com @ 2021-06-30 7:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf at linux dot ibm.com> ---
The problem shows up for option -O1 (options -O{0,2,3} are fine) and GCC 10 and
11 (mainline and GCC 9 are fine).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-30 7:41 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
@ 2021-06-30 7:58 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-30 14:08 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (16 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-30 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail| |10.3.1, 11.1.1
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
Summary|Backport 27381e78925 to GCC |[10/11 Regression] Backport
|11 |27381e78925 to GCC 11
Known to work| |12.0, 9.4.1
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
OK, can you try to pin-point the wrong transform? If GCC 10 is affected then
my store-motion comment can be ignored.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-30 7:58 ` [Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-30 14:08 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
2021-06-30 17:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com @ 2021-06-30 14:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf at linux dot ibm.com> ---
Yes, I'm already looking into this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-30 14:08 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
@ 2021-06-30 17:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-30 19:04 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (14 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-30 17:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I've reproduced it with -O1 -march=z14 and it started with
r10-7093-g5dc1390b41db5c1765e25fd21dad1a930a015aac
So, I think it is much more likely some RA issue or RTL optimization issue and
the r12-145 change just makes it latent.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-30 17:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-30 19:04 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
2021-07-01 16:58 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (13 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com @ 2021-06-30 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf at linux dot ibm.com> ---
I had a look at the optimized tree output which looks good to me. However, I
see that split2 transforms
(insn 218 222 114 15 (set (reg/v:TI 10 %r10 [orig:87 a ] [87])
(reg/v:TI 18 %f4 [orig:87 a ] [87])) 1466 {movti}
(nil))
into
(insn 234 222 235 15 (set (reg:DI 10 %r10 [ a ])
(reg:DI 18 %f4)) 1467 {*movdi_64}
(nil))
(insn 235 234 114 15 (set (reg:DI 11 %r11 [orig:87 a+8 ] [87])
(unspec:DI [
(reg:V2DI 18 %f4)
(const_int 1 [0x1])
] UNSPEC_VEC_EXTRACT)) 495 {*vec_extractv2di}
(nil))
which might be wrong. If I swap r10 by r11 via
diff --git a/gcc/config/s390/s390.md b/gcc/config/s390/s390.md
index 7faf775fbf2..0319934062a 100644
--- a/gcc/config/s390/s390.md
+++ b/gcc/config/s390/s390.md
@@ -1747,8 +1747,8 @@
(set (match_dup 3) (unspec:DI [(match_dup 5) (const_int 1)]
UNSPEC_VEC_EXTRACT))]
{
- operands[2] = operand_subword (operands[0], 0, 0, TImode);
- operands[3] = operand_subword (operands[0], 1, 0, TImode);
+ operands[2] = operand_subword (operands[0], 1, 0, TImode);
+ operands[3] = operand_subword (operands[0], 0, 0, TImode);
operands[4] = gen_rtx_REG (DImode, REGNO (operands[1]));
operands[5] = gen_rtx_REG (V2DImode, REGNO (operands[1]));
})
then the compiled program just runs fine. However, I'm not sure whether this
fixes the problem or just the symptoms. I will come back to this tomorrow.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-30 19:04 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
@ 2021-07-01 16:58 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
2021-07-06 6:53 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com @ 2021-07-01 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf at linux dot ibm.com> ---
Pass split2 transforms
(insn 218 222 114 15 (set (reg/v:TI 10 %r10 [orig:87 a ] [87])
(reg/v:TI 18 %f4 [orig:87 a ] [87])) 1466 {movti}
(nil))
into
(insn 234 222 235 15 (set (reg:DI 10 %r10 [ a ])
(reg:DI 18 %f4)) 1467 {*movdi_64}
(nil))
(insn 235 234 114 15 (set (reg:DI 11 %r11 [orig:87 a+8 ] [87])
(unspec:DI [
(reg:V2DI 18 %f4)
(const_int 1 [0x1])
] UNSPEC_VEC_EXTRACT)) 495 {*vec_extractv2di}
(nil))
which is then transformed by cprop_hardreg into
(insn 234 222 235 14 (set (reg:DI 10 %r10 [ a ])
(reg:DI 11 %r11 [18])) 1467 {*movdi_64}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 11 %r11 [18])
(nil)))
(insn 235 234 114 14 (set (reg:DI 11 %r11 [orig:87 a+8 ] [87])
(unspec:DI [
(reg:V2DI 18 %f4)
(const_int 1 [0x1])
] UNSPEC_VEC_EXTRACT)) 495 {*vec_extractv2di}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:V2DI 18 %f4)
(nil)))
where in insn 234 register f4 is substituted by r11 which is wrong. This can
also be observed in the final assembler output:
vlvgp %v4,%r10,%r11
l %r2,12(%r1)
ahi %r2,-1
st %r2,12(%r1)
cijhe %r2,0,.L13
lgr %r10,%r11 // (*)
vlgvg %r11,%v4,1
Registers r10 and r11 are moved into v4. The inverse move from v4 into r10 and
r11 is broken since cprop_hardreg wrongly substitutes f4 by r11. Thus the
expected output for (*) is:
lgdr %r10,%f4
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2021-07-01 16:58 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
@ 2021-07-06 6:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-19 12:02 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-07-06 6:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|WAITING |NEW
Component|tree-optimization |rtl-optimization
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2021-07-06 6:53 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-07-19 12:02 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-08-06 13:59 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (10 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-07-19 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|[10/11 Regression] Backport |[10/11/12 Regression]
|27381e78925 to GCC 11 |Backport 27381e78925 to GCC
| |11
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Not really fixed on trunk, we just don't have a testcase there.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2021-07-19 12:02 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-08-06 13:59 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
2022-01-14 19:24 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com @ 2021-08-06 13:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #10 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf at linux dot ibm.com> ---
In regcprop we call find_oldest_value_reg which itself calls
maybe_mode_change (TImode, TImode, DImode, 10, 18)
where we have
regno += subreg_regno_offset (regno, orig_mode, offset, new_mode);
The call is made where offset equals 8 which is wrong since we are interested
in the high part which is contained in r10 and not r11. The following patch
fixes this:
diff --git a/gcc/regcprop.c b/gcc/regcprop.c
index d2a01130fe1..0e1ac12458a 100644
--- a/gcc/regcprop.c
+++ b/gcc/regcprop.c
@@ -414,9 +414,14 @@ maybe_mode_change (machine_mode orig_mode, machine_mode
copy_mode,
copy_nregs, &bytes_per_reg))
return NULL_RTX;
poly_uint64 copy_offset = bytes_per_reg * (copy_nregs - use_nregs);
- poly_uint64 offset
- = subreg_size_lowpart_offset (GET_MODE_SIZE (new_mode) + copy_offset,
- GET_MODE_SIZE (orig_mode));
+ poly_uint64 offset =
+#if WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN
+ subreg_size_highpart_offset
+#else
+ subreg_size_lowpart_offset
+#endif
+ (GET_MODE_SIZE (new_mode) + copy_offset,
+ GET_MODE_SIZE (orig_mode));
regno += subreg_regno_offset (regno, orig_mode, offset, new_mode);
if (targetm.hard_regno_mode_ok (regno, new_mode))
return gen_raw_REG (new_mode, regno);
With the patch
(insn 234 222 235 14 (set (reg:DI 10 %r10 [ a ])
(reg:DI 18 %f4)) 1376 {*movdi_64}
(nil))
is first modified into a noop
(insn 234 222 235 14 (set (reg:DI 10 %r10 [ a ])
(reg:DI 10 %r10 [18])) 1376 {*movdi_64}
(nil))
and then deleted within regcprop.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2021-08-06 13:59 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
@ 2022-01-14 19:24 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-14 19:26 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-14 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 104034 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-14 19:24 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-14 19:26 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-14 19:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-14 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
A patch was submitted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/581172.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-14 19:26 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-14 19:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-14 19:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-14 19:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12)
> A patch was submitted here:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/581172.html
Another patch was submitted here too:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/588407.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-14 19:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-14 19:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-14 19:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-14 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmm, PR 98694 seems related too.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-14 19:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-14 19:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-14 19:37 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-14 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=100342
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
And PR 100342.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-14 19:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-14 19:37 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-02-01 12:35 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-14 19:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I wonder if makes sense to create either a RTL testcase which fails on s390
still (or did in GCC 10)?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-14 19:37 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-02-01 12:35 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-09 8:53 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11 " stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-02-01 12:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Andreas Krebbel <krebbel@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b9ebf6c330e24e886e7ce148e8c680c3e06c24dc
commit r12-6960-gb9ebf6c330e24e886e7ce148e8c680c3e06c24dc
Author: Andreas Krebbel <krebbel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue Feb 1 13:33:55 2022 +0100
PR101260 regcprop: Add mode change check for copy reg
When propagating a multi-word register into an access with a smaller
mode the can_change_mode backend hook is already consulted for the
original register. This however is also required for the intermediate
copy in copy_regno which might use a different register class.
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR rtl-optimization/101260
* regcprop.cc (maybe_mode_change): Invoke mode_change_ok also for
copy_regno.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR rtl-optimization/101260
* gcc.target/s390/pr101260.c: New testcase.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2022-02-01 12:35 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-06-09 8:53 ` stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
2022-06-28 10:45 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-07 10:40 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [11 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com @ 2022-06-09 8:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
--- Comment #18 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf at linux dot ibm.com> ---
Fixed for 12 and mainline.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2022-06-09 8:53 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11 " stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
@ 2022-06-28 10:45 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-07 10:40 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [11 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-06-28 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|10.4 |10.5
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 10.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 10.5.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [11 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness
2021-06-29 15:35 [Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11 stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
` (19 preceding siblings ...)
2022-06-28 10:45 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-07 10:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-07 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|10.5 |11.5
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 10 branch is being closed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread