From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-423342-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 2943 invoked by alias); 29 May 2013 09:55:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2873 invoked by uid 48); 29 May 2013 09:55:25 -0000
From: "ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/42575] arm-eabi-gcc 64-bit multiply weirdness
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 09:55:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization, ra
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
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 resolution
Message-ID: <bug-42575-4-gQ4t06hnc1@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-42575-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-42575-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg02015.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575

ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #10 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to jules from comment #9)
> This appears to have regressed on mainline. I now get the following assembly
> output for the test case added by Maxim:
> 
> longfunc:
>         @ args = 0, pretend = 0, frame = 0
>         @ frame_needed = 0, uses_anonymous_args = 0
>         @ link register save eliminated.
>         stmfd   sp!, {r4, r5}
>         umull   r4, r5, r0, r2
>         mul     r3, r0, r3
>         mla     r1, r2, r1, r3
>         mov     r0, r4
>         add     r1, r1, r5
>         ldmfd   sp!, {r4, r5}
>         bx      lr

Current trunk (r199375) gives, I think this can be closed.

longfunc:
        @ args = 0, pretend = 0, frame = 0
        @ frame_needed = 0, uses_anonymous_args = 0
        @ link register save eliminated.
        mul     r3, r0, r3
        mla     r3, r2, r1, r3
        umull   r0, r1, r0, r2
        add     r1, r3, r1
        bx      lr