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 41ACA3858D35; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 14:10:51 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 41ACA3858D35
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1675087851;
	bh=43nw3dwnGtLlf49hkSRdrmMT9kZrWhAhc5DVY/KECug=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=wC8CTX5H3WI3V0eX82Ta+BQBA/+CwQxc1xMgKXhaj69YdA1CBDRVthIKSLHSV3rWg
	 8Dx/nq6nLIRmu7HQGZXZ43+9AF9/2EYZWXav3+X8MK+BoOlGRSrCQwbQmzaByhvVjU
	 YgJT3AgNDQqFSrEEGi0/OsC9FPYIUu8qxCyl15G0=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/108599] [12/13 Regression] Incorrect code generation
 newer intel architectures
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 14:10:50 +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: 12.1.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-108599-4-tX0GqBxlNn@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-108599-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-108599-4@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=3D108599

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
cse2 still has correct:
(insn 28 27 29 2 (set (reg:V4DI 86)
        (mem/u/c:V4DI (symbol_ref/u:DI ("*.LC2") [flags 0x2]) [0  S32 A256]=
))
"pr108599.C":6:49 1811 {movv4di_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_EQUAL (const_vector:V4DI [
                (const_int 16 [0x10]) repeated x2
                (const_int 0 [0]) repeated x2
            ])
        (nil)))
(insn 29 28 30 2 (set (mem/c:V4DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 19 frame)
                (const_int -32 [0xffffffffffffffe0])) [0 MEM <vector(4) long
unsigned int> [(void *)&D.3338]+0 S32 A256])
        (reg:V4DI 86)) "pr108599.C":6:49 1811 {movv4di_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:V4DI 86)
        (nil)))
...
(insn 35 33 36 2 (set (reg:OI 88 [ D.3338 ])
        (mem/c:OI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 19 frame)
                (const_int -32 [0xffffffffffffffe0])) [2 D.3338+0 S32 A256]=
))
"pr108599.C":20:7 discrim 3 80 {*movoi_internal_avx}
     (nil))
(insn 36 35 37 2 (set (mem:OI (reg/f:DI 7 sp) [0  S32 A64])
        (reg:OI 88 [ D.3338 ])) "pr108599.C":20:7 discrim 3 80
{*movoi_internal_avx}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:OI 88 [ D.3338 ])
        (nil)))
But dse1 turns it into incorrect:
(insn 28 27 53 2 (set (reg:V4DI 86)
        (mem/u/c:V4DI (symbol_ref/u:DI ("*.LC2") [flags 0x2]) [0  S32 A256]=
))
"pr108599.C":6:49 1811 {movv4di_internal}
     (expr_list:REG_EQUAL (const_vector:V4DI [
                (const_int 16 [0x10]) repeated x2
                (const_int 0 [0]) repeated x2
            ])
        (nil)))
(insn 53 28 52 2 (set (reg:DI 94)
        (const_int 16 [0x10])) "pr108599.C":6:49 82 {*movdi_internal}
     (nil))
(insn 52 53 54 2 (set (reg:V4DI 93)
        (vec_duplicate:V4DI (reg:DI 94))) "pr108599.C":6:49 8004 {vec_dupv4=
di}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 94)
        (nil)))
(insn 54 52 30 2 (set (reg:OI 92)
        (subreg:OI (reg:V4DI 93) 0)) "pr108599.C":6:49 80 {*movoi_internal_=
avx}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:V4DI 93)
        (expr_list:REG_EQUAL (const_wide_int 0x100000000000000010)
            (nil))))
...
(insn 35 33 36 2 (set (reg:OI 88 [ D.3338 ])
        (reg:OI 92)) "pr108599.C":20:7 discrim 3 80 {*movoi_internal_avx}
     (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:OI 92)
        (nil)))=