[Bug lto/56295] [4.8 Regression] Missed optimization with LTO

["rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56295

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2013-02-12
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot       |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
                   |gnu.org                     |
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.8.0
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-12 12:21:19 UTC ---
With -O3 -flto the loop is not peeled before loop-distribution and thus the
inner loop is identified as memcpy.  With -O3 the inner loop is peeled.

That is because at cunrolli we see with -flto

Statement _8 = b[i_1][j_2];
 is probably executed at most 3 (bounded by 3) + 1 times in loop 2.

vs. without -flto

Statement _8 = b[i_1][j_2];
 is executed at most 3 (bounded by 3) + 1 times in loop 1.

With -flto we run into

  /* For arrays at the end of the structure, we are not guaranteed that they
     do not really extend over their declared size.  However, for arrays of
     size greater than one, this is unlikely to be intended.  */
  if (array_at_struct_end_p (base))
    {
      at_end = true;
      upper = false;

for b[i_1][j_2] (where it is really a MEM[&b][i_1][j_2]).  That's because
array_at_struct_end_p doesn't consider MEM_REFs and we (in this case)
needlessly wrap b in a MEM_REF during streaming out (so that at input time
prevailing decl replacement does not change aliasing / tree code validity).
We should probably undo this at streaming in time where possible.

I have a patch that does this.