From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 07F7E3858D32; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 03:31:11 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 07F7E3858D32 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1666063871; bh=OITDpoXXoTtNUHyuhVL1Zeht0mf7i5NYRwE7ZSJHJwQ=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ruJmtlzXYRZdZBEtn9k3MMx1ktOMel5xHjojh+hi0s3uVoBPKfmlQ+iKgZr+OvYhu nN/r4eeaqrB/kCjsn5PmMU72pJUaNGG02i0pzirOQTdWcFubGUsc4hZ7iTpiViAbeG DMSivlO2zHqsz5qOnqbJWRNUbDRJDHAN9AVXophQ= From: "crazylht at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107269] wrong code at -O1 and above with "-fno-tree-ccp" on x86_64-linux-gnu Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 03:31:10 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: crazylht at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: DUPLICATE 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: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107269 --- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3) > Looks like the same issue as PR107172 since below change can also pass all > the > testcase in the PR. >=20 > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md > index 8e847520491..be815341af5 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md > @@ -21335,7 +21335,7 @@ (define_insn "*x86_movcc_0_m1_neg" > (define_expand "x86_movcc_0_m1_neg" > [(parallel > [(set (match_operand:SWI48 0 "register_operand") > - (neg:SWI48 (ltu:SWI48 (reg:CCC FLAGS_REG) (const_int 0)))) > + (neg:SWI48 (ltu:SWI48 (reg:CC FLAGS_REG) (const_int 0)))) > (clobber (reg:CC FLAGS_REG))])]) >=20 > (define_split Sorry, my patch against an older gcc before the guilty commit, and I compare the result between it and latest GCC, that's why it show the patch pass the testcase.=