From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9920385B831 for ; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:40:15 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org B9920385B831 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02SNWYR7062587; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 19:40:00 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3022jsncuj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 28 Mar 2020 19:40:00 -0400 Received: from m0098421.ppops.net (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 02SNY1qr064559; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 19:40:00 -0400 Received: from ppma02dal.us.ibm.com (a.bd.3ea9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.62.189.10]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3022jsncub-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 28 Mar 2020 19:40:00 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma02dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma02dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02SNYsdk013436; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:39:59 GMT Received: from b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.16]) by ppma02dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 301x7676qe-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:39:59 +0000 Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.234]) by b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 02SNdw0l21627242 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:39:58 GMT Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 527A16A04D; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:39:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84F1C6A047; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:39:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.160.53.188] (unknown [9.160.53.188]) by b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:39:57 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] lower-subreg: PR94123, SVN r273240, causes gcc.target/powerpc/pr87507.c to fail To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: GCC Patches , "ian@airs.com" , Richard Biener References: <20ee8944-f0bf-cec1-e3d1-5dd5e9c6a4ef@linux.ibm.com> <20200328192252.GM22482@gate.crashing.org> From: Peter Bergner Message-ID: <1d9009c1-7902-44e2-ba36-6e985e84f5eb@linux.ibm.com> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 18:39:56 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200328192252.GM22482@gate.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-28_10:2020-03-27, 2020-03-28 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxlogscore=744 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003280214 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:40:16 -0000 On 3/28/20 2:22 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 05:41:36PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: >> A different (ie, safer) approach would be to just rerun lower-subreg at >> its old location, regardless of whether we used -fsplit-wide-types-early. > > That is my preference, for a simpler reason even: when I added the new > pass I disabled the old one, thinking it wouldn't do anything useful > anymore. Here you show that isn't true. > >> This way, we are not changing lower-subreg's behaviour, just running it an >> extra time (3 times instead of twice when using -fsplit-wide-types-early). >> I don't think lower-subreg is too expensive to run an extra time > > Yes, I think so too. Right. However, like I said though, the downside is that we don't expose the decomposed uses to passes in between subreg2 and subreg3, like combine, etc. Isn't that why you moved it early in the first place? Then again, maybe you're getting the important cases now and subreg3 is just cleanup? That said, I'm fine with whatever you, richi and others want. >> /* opt_pass methods: */ >> - virtual bool gate (function *) { return flag_split_wide_types >> - && !flag_split_wide_types_early; } >> + virtual bool gate (function *) { return flag_split_wide_types != 0; } > > I think you mean > return flag_split_wide_types != 0 != 0 != 0; Heh, I was just reverting it to the code prior to your change. I can make that just "return flag_split_wide_types;" if you like and we end up going with this version. Peter