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 D844E3858409; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 07:32:56 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D844E3858409
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1705303976;
	bh=z3Wcz581kMsw9MgaD2dAZku3nhydemTksty6de4hM6c=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=qC8wYFeaiALK5sI/Tskb0RYbpQUM3ui5CyWBEzU5yGCZ7bG1WD6zi5DvZOqhboDaj
	 vQtlHtnKJJuTEfzJTTnocP1bGxLARGZiZebugpc1UITf7vRna867sxzTPbsZneDAty
	 3KOrcRnkvEhsx53TVK6AXyuAsLT9itCJF6ALK6hI=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/111267] [14 Regression] Codegen regression
 from i386 argument passing changes
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 07:32:55 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: roger at nextmovesoftware dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-111267-4-Palm6CXOAc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111267-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111267-4@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=3D111267

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes, this is basically "folding", and across multiple insns this requires
fwprop or combine.

    9: r111:TI=3Dzero_extend(r112:DI)
   10: r111:TI=3Dr111:TI&<0,0xffffffffffffffff>|zero_extend(r113:DI)<<0x40
   74: r137:DI=3Dr111:TI#0
   75: r138:DI=3Dr111:TI#8

I'm not sure fwprop even tries to do 9->10->74 though.

The suggested change to drop the call to "profitable" seems to remove any
cost checking done (and is also not consistent with the other call we do
on notes?).

Would ssa-combine have catched the above?=