From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id F2F883940CED; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:44:22 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F2F883940CED DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1583955862; bh=U6YtS7ev0jXibPE94VHBStSWibnofSXBRSwdJYG6m6U=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=h0hf7reUj0l3M3aXqjIwa1n84Mu30Vmg/rBrBNJiPMCCTMW2mv3YupqHFXmw4Hrfc iP89WQoOatJjrw6i2WkBNESfwNOk1rk2Q4ZjC2tbQ6Gr5zjRqAont+kDCioT6Guzj/ JS31HlXhJY4Ik2La06HKyHHnuPEVxmbJr8DWsRf0= From: "segher at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/94123] [10 regression] r10-1734, SVN r273240, causes gcc.target/powerpc/pr87507.c to fail Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:44:22 +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: 10.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: segher at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:44:23 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94123 Segher Boessenkool changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2020-03-11 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool --- Confirmed. On p9 it is all fine. On p7 it is worse, you get std's followed by an lxvd2x from the same stack address (big LHS/SHL hazard there), and then two stxvd2x. On p8 the TImode values aren't split at all, not until final output anyway.=