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 6C642384D143; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 21:01:13 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6C642384D143
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1661547673;
	bh=FB8Di5kG/2G0BGAqYWoMXz8LvlbDdQbvNj4i9hx7Zt4=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=LWjUPCMoJK0cLaRvkExORUr/+klcAfZqXs5hU15qliZYcPBnVycK9AqIuo4oOjZmH
	 ZBEgJEbBxxmu14ROQCraNGXmIASTfmg0j8c6lNLP01V1GzDtx1voA2LFd6L+8eP1yz
	 WY7fMWTAuBj3yjKnETqvCL0HdGGVhlRfDvsTAZec=
From: "segher at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/106755] Incorrect code gen for altivec intrinsics with
 constant inputs
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 21:01:13 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: blocker
X-Bugzilla-Who: segher at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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-106755-4-WEh7D7rEJW@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-106755-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-106755-4@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=3D106755

--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #2)
> So the tests (I've removed all static inline usage and always use
> -fno-inline) pass with -O1 and fail with -O2 and -O3.  Looking at all of =
the
> optimizations enabled by -O2 that are not in -O1 and using -fno-* for the=
m,
> the only option that allows the tests to pass with -O2 is
> -fno-strict-aliasing.  That said, -Wall and -Wstrict-aliasing do not flag
> any warnings with the code.  I suppose they could miss some issues in the
> test case code???

There are 10 cases (in just the .cc files) that use "optimize > 1", and
another 5 that do "optimize >=3D 2".

The -O options do more than just being shorthand for some -f option selecti=
ons.=