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 CA87C3858C54; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 20:14:23 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org CA87C3858C54
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1679948063;
	bh=9lHRCiKbnYK1bm0oyJJXedqvJPC/FFUZH0zqS5w/EJQ=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=X2uz5yIRjQBOVHB4b7M4alQsKGmq/owwaBMooZ1lrRxFvROyCg6sW5CTVO3KcicBM
	 U5XjsiI4kaA1D5P75NrI9yHnWZJ9ICVUY20dixJGySBIMIZsimMKSnv4FaGDJBxwcQ
	 rhl2hOymRrFXowM/d62g9L7/vdVdMYCLjUzdFVgM=
From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/109276] [11/12/13 Regression] ICE: in
 assign_stack_local_1, at function.cc:429 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 20:14:23 +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: 12.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-109276-4-d8nBqJL9C4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109276-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109276-4@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=3D109276

--- Comment #17 from Uro=C5=A1 Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> (In reply to Uro=C5=A1 Bizjak from comment #15)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> > > asks for a DImode stack slot, ix86_local_alignment newly doesn't lowe=
r the
> > > alignment
> > > which isn't good for -mpreferred-stack-boundary=3D2.
> >=20
> > IIRC, DImode FILD/FIST(P) instructions execute faster when memory is al=
igned
> > to 64 bits. *If* it is possible, 64 bit alignment is preferred.
>=20
> Well, user who uses -mpreferred-stack-boundary=3D2 probably doesn't care =
about
> performance that much.  I guess I could also check whether we've already
> decided to dynamically reallocate the stack for some other reasons and on=
ly
> use 32-bit alignment if we haven't.
> But there are too many such flags, so not sure what to check.

No need to complicate things too much, I agree that by using
-mpreferred-stack-boundary=3D2 user made a compromise w.r.t. performance.=