public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "roger at nextmovesoftware dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/109766] Passing doubles through the stack generates a stack adjustment per each such argument at -Os/-Oz. Date: Mon, 08 May 2023 16:28:56 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-109766-4-xO9eh0ygMm@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-109766-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109766 Roger Sayle <roger at nextmovesoftware dot com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last reconfirmed| |2023-05-08 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW --- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle <roger at nextmovesoftware dot com> --- I believe the problem is in the cprop_hardreg pass, which undoes reload's register assignments (to use DImode GPR registers with -Os), by propagating DF mode values into *pushdi2_rex64, which then get split during the split3 pass into lea/movq pairs, that are each larger than a DImode push. The work around, for this test case, is to use -Os -fno-cprop-registers which produces code that's shorter than -O2. 0000000000000000 <callfunc>: 0: 66 48 0f 7e ca movq %xmm1,%rdx 5: 66 48 0f 7e d1 movq %xmm2,%rcx a: 66 48 0f 7e de movq %xmm3,%rsi f: 50 push %rax 10: 66 49 0f 7e e0 movq %xmm4,%r8 15: 66 48 0f 7e c0 movq %xmm0,%rax 1a: 66 49 0f 7e e9 movq %xmm5,%r9 1f: 66 49 0f 7e f2 movq %xmm6,%r10 24: 66 49 0f 7e fb movq %xmm7,%r11 29: 41 53 push %r11 2b: 41 52 push %r10 2d: 41 51 push %r9 2f: 41 50 push %r8 31: 56 push %rsi 32: 51 push %rcx 33: 52 push %rdx 34: 50 push %rax 35: b0 08 mov $0x8,%al 37: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 3c <callfunc+0x3c> 3c: 48 83 c4 48 add $0x48,%rsp 40: c3 retq Now to figure out if there's a way, using target rtx_costs or pushdi2_rex64's constraints/predicates, to prevent hardreg cprop performing this substitution. Plan B might be to investigate reload's choice of DFmode SSE vs DImode GPR, but this is within one or two bytes of optimal (for four arguments I believe GCC would produce shorter code than clang).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-08 16:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-05-08 9:06 [Bug middle-end/109766] New: Passing doubles through the stack generates a stack adjustment pear " pskocik at gmail dot com 2023-05-08 13:51 ` [Bug middle-end/109766] Passing doubles through the stack generates a stack adjustment per " sjames at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-08 16:28 ` roger at nextmovesoftware dot com [this message] 2023-06-16 8:47 ` roger at nextmovesoftware dot com
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-109766-4-xO9eh0ygMm@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).