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 F10F03858D32; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 13:39:49 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F10F03858D32
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1700228389;
	bh=F7bxZgsMe1Zs0BY35WsnbVZEjEv7H6nMCHEgjhpnGBk=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=LnSVk1iw4BbsBXOWn+31yk6079REgXgL+jUsF8nP+53lLfF2hdMVyTbtvqZMYV2uq
	 bzizywmtVoWYYz10xpc2pxvXz3gSiYg69IfF+jhoLDStdiWmqR8SF2fcQC3RV8GCAy
	 3k5ZhpqAXbxPU3goY0tKOASfqCve1JN3soM7y1hc=
From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/111657] Memory copy with structure assignment from named
 address space should be improved
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 13:39:49 +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: 12.3.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-111657-4-icghEaWCci@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111657-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111657-4@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=3D111657

--- Comment #9 from Uro=C5=A1 Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> I'd say it is a user error to invoke memcpy/memset etc. with pointers to
> non-default address spaces, and for aggregate copies the middle-end should
> ensure that the copying is not done using library calls; is that the case
> and the problem was just that optab expansion was allowed for the structu=
re
> copies and the backend decided to use libcall in that case?

Yes, the stringop selection mechanism chose libcall strategy. However, the =
call
to memcpy is unavailable for non-default address space, so the middle-end
expanded the call into most trivial byte-copy loop. The patch just teaches
stringop selection to use optimized copy loop as a last resort with non-def=
ault
address spaces instead.=