From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-486343-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 83285 invoked by alias); 15 May 2015 14:35:37 -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 83199 invoked by uid 48); 15 May 2015 14:35:33 -0000
From: "ramana at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/66049] Few AArch64 extend and add with shift tests generates sub optimal code with trunk gcc 6.0.
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 14:35:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-66049-4-gTCIYYidk9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66049-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66049-4@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: 2015-05/txt/msg01183.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66049

Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ramana at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to vekumar from comment #4)
> (In reply to ktkachov from comment #3)
> > Venkat, are you planning to submit this patch to gcc-patches?
> > Also, does this mean we can remove the patterns that do arith+shift using
> > MULT rtxes? (like *adds_<optab><mode>_multp2)
> 
> Hi Kyrill, 
> 
> Yes I am planing to submit the patch. But before that I need to test by
> putting some assert and check if *adds_<optab><mode>_multp2 and similar
> patterns are not used anymore.

So this is a regression on GCC 6. what's holding up pushing this patch onto
gcc-patches@ ?