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 501663858D38; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 15:30:20 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 501663858D38
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1707751820;
	bh=LODnbJ5AtGOl0D6lZfWmNUlvXr92l3nhNsDSaQ9xOdo=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=fSfVjML/hIgYyxWg1ZEVVyxfZ/pyNTcD5F30isW7Y/z7EiiiUH4F7KwezMiG7awje
	 HAswQaqcbDaAGMkPQNHg/CabtGzcUvw53RYboNCgXRVO+xqZFkhRN24C8t9bnsP5nC
	 4Nw5QOnY/7e+e0c+An1nGxyT3w2cjbVweh36aMQc=
From: "jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/113847] [14 Regression] 10% slowdown of 462.libquantum
 on AMD Ryzen 7700X and Ryzen 7900X
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 15:30:19 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113847-4-2JMBLL1cdC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113847-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113847-4@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=3D113847

--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> CCing also Martin who should know how/why IPA SRA doesn't reconstruct the
> component ref chain here=20

I have not had a look at this specific case (yet), but IPA-SRA just
doesn't (unlike intraprocedural SRA) and always creates MEM_REFs (in
callers).  I guess we could stream field offsets and/or array_ref
indices and attempt to reconstruct it for simple (non-union,
non-otherwise-overlapping) types, even if it would make the
ipa_adjusted_param type (and thus ipa_param_adjustments) slightly
bigger and add another vector.

> or why it choses the dynamic type as it does
> (possibly local SRA when fully scalarizing an aggregate copy does the sam=
e).

That is unlikely.  Total scalarization in intraprocedural SRA just
follows the type of the decl whereas IPA-SRA (and intra-SRA too when
not totally scalarizing) takes all types from existing memory
accesses.=