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 02B99385702D; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 17:29:43 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 02B99385702D
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1595179784;
 bh=RJis6sqzBpV4PrEnW80hXQbgHsEcX7dXYmSNjX54+Sc=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=y5OjV4/CTIBOCH4u1T9Qjm7gY5hFakFan/VgnOvvsENS4stQGgoJ80rZZ0damueJq
 Y0/vlG2Lcmeq8RTGc/FKR/ogk2KiX72UJ4MftJ/wkrIiktpeGiJL61l9VchbycZ0Iv
 OgTB8AZuiWMJsCNKVrWe96VWkyjnE+pfwfqd6+iY=
From: "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/31593] Invariant DO loop variables and subroutines
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 17:29:43 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: tkoenig 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: 
Message-ID: <bug-31593-4-Ys4kzjtTgZ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-31593-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-31593-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 17:29:44 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D31593

--- Comment #50 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #49)

> The second loop:
>=20
> .L3:
> 	leaq	8(%rsp), %rdi
> 	call	intent_in_
> 	movl	%ebx, 8(%rsp)
> 	addl	$1, %ebx
> 	cmpl	$12, %ebx
> 	jne	.L3
>=20
> No reload from the stack, but not quite ideal yet.  That
> movl %ebx, 8(%rsp) would have been unneeded had one of the
> callee-saved registers been used.

Actually, that comment is not correct - we need to store the
value of the argument so the subroutine an access it.

So, we're just seeing the inevitable overhead of passing
by reference here.=