From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 975DC3858D31; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 07:03:33 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 975DC3858D31 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1587366213; bh=bQIUizPIWi4tdQyEjPWqA1ykaiuZue2D6Eq4S8P1dkw=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=J5SiSKKebJeuJwpSKNa81UdUdN95FDLDeXIk9IiHclfpyXZva4Kv3NBHfKc8ImL7B T3MDP/Ts+UWxkXlsrQ3vCNgTfRUx5aK9XFcO21saD+q0cvTPMiWnfIZ0oErzmm3ep0 eS9tgH6lRstZDYA87Z3V320kZEAjaiSI0BZDIlNg= From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/94649] 16-byte aligned atomic_compare_exchange doesn not generate cmpxcg16b on x86_64 Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 07:03:33 +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: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 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: cf_gcctarget 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: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 07:03:33 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94649 Richard Biener changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target| |x86_64-*-* --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- It's also an ABI issue when code compiled with -mcx16 and without -mcx16 ha= s to inter-operate. So it might be a deliberate choice and not a missed optimization.=