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 60C373858413; Fri,  7 Jul 2023 05:05:27 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 60C373858413
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1688706327;
	bh=EAS4Qeangi++k99hkxOsKNgyc+u7r7YjN/qDwtZ3G2A=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=EWLXQ1Z9WimGxahfgIv7SAmdKujv1NiuPS7RpACTAEvvdiIZ2FaiBcxGbthKLFs7U
	 7kFqZpykj9QZeYmPmQc7UNMwPceeY4vtjV09XBZac3SL0dZd1/Em4fTXXVmMQdA03C
	 lo66qsA/weFO3Q/3gB/tfIs4MUsVos/ooo/c1X8s=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/104914] [MIPS] wrong comparison with scrabbled
 int value
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2023 05:05:27 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-104914-4-EwjeSRjYtH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-104914-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-104914-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D104914

--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> Created attachment 55496 [details]
> old patch against GCC 4.7
>=20
> I am trying to find my notes on this old patch but our internal bug system
> has moved a few times and the project looks archived even.
> But I am pretty sure this is related to the problem at hand.

(note I had another patch before that which renamed store_bit_field_1 to
store_bit_field_2).

The code is now in store_bit_field_using_insv.
Here:
          else
            {
              tmp =3D gen_lowpart_if_possible (op_mode, value1);
              if (! tmp)
                tmp =3D gen_lowpart (op_mode, force_reg (value_mode, value1=
));
            }
          value1 =3D tmp;
        }

But I don't have any other notes on my change (nor a testcase).=