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 6A72F3846024; Fri, 10 May 2024 15:32:34 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6A72F3846024
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1715355154;
	bh=hfY01pl2/ONyk7VTPZG3YoSRWsP9CrdursCXc5Fc79o=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=PnUwNNWjZ9FkbYPuV6dVunVHf2RylO8YMLbv6ZVFsnmY5zxl/WOI1RtNv6Qy51K7r
	 /6GP1sdHWHjqnqFb6TsSz2Le8CyxUwZuui0HsmF95TIu+wI/vFN7fQv/TwvxkQdR1X
	 JulbZLz6kSo5/rZmLnoPtuEdcu7WxkaUYZemHRFs=
From: "xxs_chy at outlook dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/115034] Missed optimization: reduntant store
 of identical value in the slot
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 15:32:34 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: xxs_chy at outlook dot com
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-115034-4-3g7n3ETIvx@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-115034-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-115034-4@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=3D115034

--- Comment #2 from XChy <xxs_chy at outlook dot com> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Note there is some memory model requirements here that I always forget if
> this can happen or not.

Hmm. Could you please provide some documents about the memory model of GCC =
or
specific constraints about C language? The semantics of IR in the LLVM issue
look good to me, since the store is non-volatile and non-atomic. But I'm not
sure how it would be after lifting to C.=