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 0E0613858D20; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 02:17:21 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0E0613858D20
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1678846641;
	bh=XscqCCI221w+i4sbyP8WCK6UGnOtcl7oAdiumgOxb0Y=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=EVHM8Mj/YtgWNLF82iavX2euZLDQodNwqYjxAa5huTtz28+e2RlZK/zYdGWjakNLf
	 PqXBIONf2a/xtn50mDD0cIeZHfLoXZCfQ486kATcOGCMbHPtzMSZYRavBEl7Q+XBwh
	 PKhgrtGotYPvHlEr4h0pmjMZjJTrExlR16Rkq2Nk=
From: "liwei at loongson dot cn" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/109086] Bug of builtin_strcmp in the case of
 using the adddi3 instruction patterns
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 02:17:20 +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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: liwei at loongson dot cn
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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-109086-4-7tD5c3mMsJ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109086-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109086-4@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=3D109086

--- Comment #8 from liwei at loongson dot cn ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #7)
> Things are already wrong in 255r:
>=20
> (jump_insn 17 16 42 4 (set (pc)
>         (if_then_else (ne (reg:DI 90)
>                 (const_int 0 [0]))
>             (label_ref 20)
>             (pc))) "t.c":4:23 discrim 1 -1
>      (int_list:REG_BR_PROB 536870916 (nil))
>  -> 20)
> (note 42 17 18 5 [bb 5] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
> (insn 18 42 19 5 (set (reg:SI 91)
>         (zero_extend:SI (mem:QI (plus:DI (reg/v/f:DI 82 [ filename ])
>                     (const_int 1 [0x1])) [0 MEM <char[1:2]> [(void
> *)filename_3(D)]+1 S1 A8]))) "t.c":4:23 discrim 1 -1
>      (nil))
> (insn 19 18 20 5 (set (reg:DI 92)
>         (plus:DI (subreg:DI (reg:SI 91) 0)
>             (const_int 0 [0]))) "t.c":4:23 discrim 1 -1
>      (nil))
> (code_label 20 19 43 6 3 (nil) [1 uses])
> (note 43 20 21 6 [bb 6] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
> (insn 21 43 22 6 (set (reg:DI 80 [ _1 ])
>         (sign_extend:DI (subreg:SI (reg:DI 92) 0))) "t.c":4:23 discrim 1 =
-1
>      (nil))
>=20
> Note that the jump_insn jumps over insn 19 which initializes the vreg 92
> (which would become r13).

Thanks for the reply, i am trying to debug inline_string_cmp again to expla=
in
the problem in more detail.=