From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 150D5388A83F; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 19:03:03 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 150D5388A83F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1596135783;
 bh=ifhttFsg2yPO8CD9hMrhiiovejxeHDnwFXOi5z8xUDI=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=VYq9b3l7iWg82sU65gje0vrpGjl3uNRdLHk3cjv74wSbAADL9294ccSE93I545cD9
 XZRhxSYg/ltYV8pzI/t3r9Kjl8hSbzZ1xgF+qdyaVQx+pQdv0EoIyTqyT+QSQhyqG9
 GY1gYMhIn1Ye9ONu4qG3k9GyoSXscVV4TDCKR9dE=
From: "glisse at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/96327] Inefficient increment through pointer to volatile
 on x86
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 19:03:02 +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: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: DUPLICATE
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-96327-4-qhnBspG0kA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-96327-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-96327-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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 <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 19:03:03 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96327

--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I don't think bug 3506 has been fixed (its status seems wrong to me). But d=
on't
worry, there are several other duplicates that still have status NEW (bug 5=
0677
for instance).
This is a sensible enhancement request, I think some gcc backends already d=
o a
similar optimization, it simply isn't a priority, because volatile almost m=
eans
"don't optimize this".
At least the difference between the gcc and clang codes matches those other
PRs. Not sure why you are talking of address computations.=