public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug rtl-optimization/4079] unnecessary register move on simple code
[not found] <bug-4079-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2023-05-16 23:46 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-16 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4079
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to work| |8.1.0
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Known to fail| |4.8.5
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This has been fixed for a while. At least in GCC 8. Maybe even before.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/4079] unnecessary register move on simple code
[not found] <bug-4079-153@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2007-02-02 0:59 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-02-02 1:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-02-02 1:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-02 01:05 -------
So I think the problem here now (after lower subreg was added) is the issue of
splitting of the multiplication late after reload.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4079
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/4079] unnecessary register move on simple code
[not found] <bug-4079-153@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2007-02-02 0:59 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-02-02 1:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-02-02 0:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-02 00:58 -------
Hmm, I see in expand:
(insn 12 14 13 (set (subreg:SI (reg:DI 124) 4)
(lshiftrt:SI (subreg:SI (reg:DI 123) 0)
(const_int 0 [0x0]))) -1 (nil)
(expr_list:REG_NO_CONFLICT (reg:DI 123)
(nil)))
That makes little sense as the shift amount is 0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4079
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-05-16 23:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-4079-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2023-05-16 23:46 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/4079] unnecessary register move on simple code pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
[not found] <bug-4079-153@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2007-02-02 0:59 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-02-02 1:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
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).