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 50D333858CD9; Fri, 24 May 2024 07:45:03 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 50D333858CD9
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1716536703;
	bh=QjwzG/4mnG6zzKepVkqBvZocIsZ00GIy/QXmywl2mUc=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=oiB+zt2PZN9DodkUcGqJL+gt/jUhq9xmKg50K+CNqqMPsmYdFAvxezeU6QBBdscts
	 Da1Jh54ErJn3IZwLPUvFa4tAwpTcDTfRJgoauqGp+9Lvf7LaUq/EBswMS6YaNCwnBR
	 ZzcjB2TKe39/IG7uED4aJUKSDPZqzg1ZIXz42QeU=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/115210] Missed optimization opportunity in
 redundant copies for large structure
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 07:45:02 +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: 15.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: bug_status cc cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed
 keywords
Message-ID: <bug-115210-4-WCnnB3EAO7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-115210-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-115210-4@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=3D115210

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
                 CC|                            |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2024-05-24
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
           Keywords|                            |missed-optimization

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
SRA has a limit on the size of structures decomposed and GCC does not have a
aggregate copy propagation pass but relies on SRA.

There's --param sra-max-scalarization-size-{Osize,Ospeed}

Being able to perform copy coalescing(!) for A =3D B when B dies at the
assignment and A becomes live without this limit and without decomposing
but from SRA analysis would be nice.=