public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/114591] [12/13/14 Regression] register allocators introduce an extra load operation since gcc-12 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 07:28:16 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-114591-4-aBnvgxGPQl@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-114591-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114591 --- Comment #15 from Hongtao Liu <liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > I don't see this as problematic. IIRC, there was a discussion in the past > that a couple (two?) memory accesses from the same location close to each > other can be faster (so, -O2, not -Os) than preloading the value to the > register first. At lease for memory with vector mode, it's better to preload the value to register first. > > In contrast, the example from the Comment #11 already has the correct value > in %eax, so there is no need to reload it again from memory, even in a > narrower mode. So the problem is why cse can't handle same memory with narrower mode, maybe it's because there's zero_extend in the first load. cse looks like can handle simple wider mode memory. 4952 /* See if a MEM has already been loaded with a widening operation; 4953 if it has, we can use a subreg of that. Many CISC machines 4954 also have such operations, but this is only likely to be 4955 beneficial on these machines. */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-11 7:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-04-04 18:57 [Bug rtl-optimization/114591] New: rtl-reload " absoler at smail dot nju.edu.cn 2024-04-04 19:03 ` [Bug target/114591] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-04 19:07 ` [Bug target/114591] [12/13/14 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-05 2:32 ` [Bug target/114591] [12/13/14 Regression] register allocators " law at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-08 15:02 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-10 7:51 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2024-04-10 8:17 ` liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-10 8:30 ` liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-10 8:36 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2024-04-10 8:40 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2024-04-10 8:47 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2024-04-10 8:52 ` liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-10 9:07 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2024-04-10 9:12 ` liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-11 6:33 ` liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-11 6:54 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2024-04-11 7:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-11 7:28 ` liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2024-04-11 7:37 ` liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
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-114591-4-aBnvgxGPQl@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).