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 B07D83858C39; Fri,  1 Mar 2024 09:27:22 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B07D83858C39
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1709285242;
	bh=U3q+uK1THtOp3WuOi/I0+vbQez5zgKU9R0FhPs6LnIQ=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=wNoiMn2n4p6TNwjBBIoF71M+VC2velrb/AViJoIqB6wWKgyc+YWJRvBzNMgBgKhFs
	 EGWqFhsitVwM8xVNCD6HKcwp6XnLh5MBzKr80vCaVroiyoXTFVIOGl8jljJumbyNId
	 g8Q+h9m5aE0xRmlZiN4ryGY/mcmzPLRwNIm7LTHw=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/114187] [14 regression] bizarre register dance on x86_64
 for pass-by-value struct
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 09:27:14 +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: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: keywords
Message-ID: <bug-114187-4-I6No4zepAT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114187-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114187-4@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=3D114187

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |missed-optimization

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Most likely related to the TImode changes...=