From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 942B4384402F; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 15:03:44 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 942B4384402F From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 15:03:44 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc 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: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 15:03:44 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99927 Jakub Jelinek changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |segher at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- So, we have at the start of first try_combine called on bb 6: ... (insn 105 23 106 6 (set (reg:QI 135) (const_int 1 [0x1])) "pr99927.c":13:24 77 {*movqi_internal} (nil)) (insn 106 105 107 6 (parallel [ (set (reg:QI 134) (and:QI (subreg:QI (reg:SI 107) 0) (const_int 1 [0x1]))) (clobber (reg:CC 17 flags)) ]) "pr99927.c":13:24 491 {*andqi_1} (expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:CC 17 flags) (nil))) (insn 107 106 108 6 (set (reg:CCZ 17 flags) (compare:CCZ (reg:SI 107) (const_int 0 [0]))) "pr99927.c":13:24 7 {*cmpsi_ccno_1} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 107) (nil))) (insn 108 107 111 6 (set (reg:QI 96 [ var_lsm_flag.12 ]) (if_then_else:QI (eq (reg:CCZ 17 flags) (const_int 0 [0])) (reg:QI 134) (reg:QI 135))) "pr99927.c":13:24 1104 {*movqicc_noc} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:QI 134) (nil))) (insn 111 108 85 6 (set (reg:QI 96 [ var_lsm_flag.12 ]) (if_then_else:QI (eq (reg:CCZ 17 flags) (const_int 0 [0])) (reg:QI 96 [ var_lsm_flag.12 ]) (reg:QI 135))) "pr99927.c":13:24 1104 {*movqicc_noc} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:QI 135) (nil))) (jump_insn 85 111 35 6 (set (pc) (if_then_else (ne (reg:CCZ 17 flags) (const_int 0 [0])) (label_ref 45) (pc))) 806 {*jcc} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:CCZ 17 flags) (int_list:REG_BR_PROB 536870916 (nil))) -> 45) where LOG_LINKS of 108 are i105/r135, i106/r134 and i107/r17, of 111 are i108/r96 and 85 has NULL LOG_LINKS. But, r17 is used in all of i108, i111 and i85, so isn't single use, so isn'= t it incorrect that it has the i107/r17 link?=