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 D0278384403C; Thu,  1 Apr 2021 12:45:47 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D0278384403C
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/99863] [10/11 Regression] wrong code with -O
 -fno-tree-forwprop -mno-sse2 since r10-7268-g529ea7d9596b26ba
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2021 12:45:47 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: needs-bisection, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-99863-4-V1cS9otJV9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-99863-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-99863-4@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, 01 Apr 2021 12:45:47 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99863

--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99863
>=20
> Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
>=20
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---
>                  CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
>=20
> --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> I think the REG_DEAD note isn't the problem here.
> At least, when I dump bb 2 in rest_of_handle_dse right before df_analyze =
call,
> there is
> (insn 6 3 7 2 (set (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>         (compare:CCZ (reg/v:DI 203 [ y ])
>             (const_int 0 [0]))) "pr99863.c":14:12 8 {*cmpdi_ccno_1}
>      (nil))
> (insn 7 6 8 2 (set (reg:QI 205)
>         (eq:QI (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>             (const_int 0 [0]))) "pr99863.c":14:12 802 {*setcc_qi}
>      (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>         (nil)))
> ...
> (insn 40 38 41 2 (set (reg:QI 220)
>         (ne:QI (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>             (const_int 0 [0]))) "pr99863.c":15:11 802 {*setcc_qi}
>      (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>         (nil)))
> but if I dump it right after df_analyze call, I see:
> (insn 6 3 7 2 (set (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>         (compare:CCZ (reg/v:DI 203 [ y ])
>             (const_int 0 [0]))) "pr99863.c":14:12 8 {*cmpdi_ccno_1}
>      (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/v:DI 203 [ y ])
>         (nil)))
> (insn 7 6 8 2 (set (reg:QI 205)
>         (eq:QI (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>             (const_int 0 [0]))) "pr99863.c":14:12 802 {*setcc_qi}
>      (nil))
> ...
> (insn 40 38 41 2 (set (reg:QI 220)
>         (ne:QI (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>             (const_int 0 [0]))) "pr99863.c":15:11 802 {*setcc_qi}
>      (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
>         (nil)))
>=20
> i.e. the problematic REG_DEAD note is gone and I think at this point DF k=
nows
> that CC is live there.
> But replace_read has code to check for live hard regs, see
> note_stores (this_insn, look_for_hardregs, regs_set);
> in there etc.

But find_shift_sequence doesn't seem to check whether the emitted
insns contain any extra hardreg clobbers that make the replacement
invalid.=