public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/115097] New: Strange suboptimal codegen specifically at -O2 when copying struct type Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 01:02:00 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-115097-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115097 Bug ID: 115097 Summary: Strange suboptimal codegen specifically at -O2 when copying struct type Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- // https://godbolt.org/z/G7qG4vvWb (C++ version) // https://godbolt.org/z/fT793cznT (C version) struct A { int a; short b; }; A test1(A& a) { return a; } A test2(A&& a) { return a; } A test3(const A& a) { return a; } A test4(const A&& a) { return a; } At -O1, they all have the same perfect codegen: test2(A&&): mov rax, QWORD PTR [rdi] ret At -O2, all-but-one of them have weird suboptimal (but correct) codegen: test2(A&&): movzx edx, WORD PTR [rdi+4] mov eax, DWORD PTR [rdi] sal rdx, 32 or rax, rdx ret What's really weird is that it really is "all but one of them." The lexically first function will have good codegen, and then the subsequent ones will have the suboptimal codegen. You can comment out the good one and watch GCC pick another one to make good. You can reorder the definitions and see GCC's decision of which one to optimize will change. This behavior dates all the way back to GCC 5. In GCC 4.9.4, -O2 didn't have this weird behavior; all four functions would just be optimal all the time. The same symptom reproduces on x86-64, ARM64, and RISC-V (32 *and* 64). The RISC-V result seems to indicate it's not specifically limited to 64-bit. It also reproduces in C, with pointers instead of references. It seems to have something to do with the signature of the enclosing function, which is super weird: https://godbolt.org/z/KPac7bvTM
next reply other threads:[~2024-05-15 1:02 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-05-15 1:02 arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot com [this message] 2024-05-15 6:50 ` [Bug tree-optimization/115097] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-15 7:05 ` [Bug ipa/115097] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-15 7:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-15 7:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-15 7:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-15 7:34 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-15 9:05 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
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-115097-4@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).