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 7301F384AB52; Mon, 22 Apr 2024 09:10:27 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7301F384AB52
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1713777027;
	bh=Jnxh2p1mUhUDdU0QhY/PDlPIQWl4y/x0pSZPhNmttlk=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=oXHE9kZ2DnEHTjMG8BiOOViq7kBTpjAfPVBdOx7cOsiJOHm0Mhn7yjxjj+GF2VRDG
	 976wiD+dTrVrvMVfnspIdBbkrhRYtpBy+BuIEVnO0wLB4DNrf+gnYzSHeXjiGgELAm
	 hm+IT+Ebv+yJCN5f8yKnM0arFF/LNgkoPs2SgoRo=
From: "xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/114800] redundant set-zero when initiate a
 struct
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 09:10:26 +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: 13.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: xry111 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: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-114800-4-QBlW9Jaadf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114800-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114800-4@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=3D114800

Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to absoler from comment #0)

> such code is compiled as: (gcc-13.2.0 -O2, regression [11/12/13/trunk])

The regression marker isn't true.  It looks like the redundant zeroing has =
been
there even in GCC 4.8.1.  GCC 4.7 fails to compile the test case.

And IIRC there is already an report complaining some redundant zeroing like
this...=