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 39A643858D38; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 14:00:39 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 39A643858D38
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1675087239;
	bh=RBmQAbbqK/oLcNbzF6wYj2X8fPrO9ILBVNs8THyyWVU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=PeXr7Oz8t2NIiQna26U/DwtYh7VaoLQkr8EGVBLdgpQZt+YZRJuDgh8CFpdvJUk/n
	 dJd/bHgV76KWYAYcuSsno4NsDSQ9ueX/NiR/yVHHUtFl24bo0WO571hz/cDZnozaNF
	 VjWvJICSyNIJil7nBDJF1iHfgUf0SgdtSgz93zV4=
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 14:00:38 +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: bug_status
Message-ID: <bug-108599-4-vM7bTNy1MW@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

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
More simplified:
struct S
{
  unsigned long a, b, c, d;
  S () : a(0), b(0), c(0), d(0) {}
  S bar (unsigned long val) { a +=3D val; return *this; }
  S baz (unsigned long val) { b +=3D val; return *this; }
};

__attribute__((noipa)) void
foo (unsigned long x, unsigned long y, unsigned long z, unsigned long w, co=
nst
S s)
{
  if (s.a !=3D x || s.b !=3D y || s.c !=3D z || s.d !=3D w)
    __builtin_abort ();
}

int
main ()
{
  foo (16, 0, 0, 0, S ().bar (16).baz (0));
  foo (16, 16, 0, 0, S ().bar (16).baz (16));
}

It is main that is being miscompiled during RTL passes, in *.optimized we h=
ave
correct:
  MEM <vector(4) long unsigned int> [(void *)&D.3337] =3D { 16, 0, 0, 0 };
  foo (16, 0, 0, 0, D.3337);
  MEM <vector(4) long unsigned int> [(void *)&D.3338] =3D { 16, 16, 0, 0 };
  foo (16, 16, 0, 0, D.3338);
but what is actually passed in the second case is { 16, 16, 16, 16 }.
I'll have a look.=