From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-405361-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 28544 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2012 09:44:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 28462 invoked by uid 48); 1 Nov 2012 09:44:23 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/55147] [4.8 Regression] x86: wrong code for 64-bit load
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 09:44:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-55147-4-xC2Kf9NqKc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-55147-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-55147-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
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
X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg00023.txt.bz2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55147

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-01 09:44:22 UTC ---
Created attachment 28589
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28589
gcc48-pr55147.patch

So like this?  Or do you want to merge the bswap{si,di}2 expanders using SWI48
iterator too?  That would make i386.md tiny bit shorter, but would make
gen_bswapdi2 longer (as the compiler can't figure out that for DImode (thus
TARGET_64BIT) TARGET_BSWAP is always true).  Perhaps I could do
  else if (<MODE>mode == DImode || TARGET_BSWAP)
so that at least optimized gcc builds would optimize it away.