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 6913A3858C78; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 19:24:19 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6913A3858C78
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1678908259;
	bh=BMIbPi/YESQE2TcjxOF4yt07HehzNjp5xl9jU0Xsbks=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=Q9hC6aKVzT2l06K/bcEFmP4cBelB8fn0lBg+aKMPyTyIXuDuPKyqMgeqFrQxNrbcJ
	 jo7nUjGibln6yxE6tDcNo24D5l6XpzF6xsxi82JR1tXDXdWVflm4n5ypR2EA6E6ywH
	 X0xeAB1Y3nINIXsVLB5dJ5PJeNzWRkunwiTG4IMw=
From: "hjl.tools at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/109093] [13 regression] csmith: a February runtime bug ?
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 19:24:18 +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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-109093-4-Pymyj0lAD7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109093-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109093-4@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=3D109093

--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
.DEFERRED_INIT has

insn 259 261 297 4 (set (reg/f:DI 144)=20
        (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 19 frame)
            (const_int -32 [0xffffffffffffffe0]))) 241 {*leadi}
     (expr_list:REG_EQUAL (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 19 frame)
            (const_int -32 [0xffffffffffffffe0]))
        (nil)))

vs explicit __builtin_memset

insn 264 149 153 34 (set (reg/f:DI 144)=20
        (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 19 frame)
            (const_int -32 [0xffffffffffffffe0]))) 241 {*leadi}
     (expr_list:REG_EQUIV (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 19 frame)
            (const_int -32 [0xffffffffffffffe0]))
        (nil)))

LRA can eliminate (reg/f:DI 144) with REG_EQUIV, but not with REG_EQUAL.=