From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-il1-x134.google.com (mail-il1-x134.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::134]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BBD23870C26 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:43:24 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 7BBD23870C26 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-il1-x134.google.com with SMTP id e9e14a558f8ab-351208d0d6cso38979175ab.1 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 06:43:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1695995003; x=1696599803; darn=gcc.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jCbz8rDtQkdPx5ARkB3OXZb7jzb0GDFHfHw8u2ALwk4=; b=Z4/74iqjLs9fFn7MfaGDTGyOfqPvUeMQk0siYe1bhUzBtUOvThnte2F03Acn5p3aWW ydJzS+Yke8j1mBtvp+WOUbweR7231RqhI1R0qFAVs5OfMYig56FkirdzvMuOBoPFSZGX 3Q/Z4QCbSaap7xF5J3xi55YQBY6o0ufzJtpCy73GWW5M5TX73+88DJPEjijM6b/0xELI peis09QHmgfJLUi/TxVDpWZnTxJATZdzFqVubWoKn/Lv6hReH6un/xlZRB3rYmTBobYp pXQZhNJ0Sxyq42aFmdUKVntOsWItNZBHXlKvdjPEzMnkZ/pG7r1qF9ECFiL+cERnkuMS M+OQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1695995003; x=1696599803; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jCbz8rDtQkdPx5ARkB3OXZb7jzb0GDFHfHw8u2ALwk4=; b=f7rQm2BjGqF6iEdgep1kCcYUyJTSDl9WzKWyubwR7wRBawkloqCcZJxcsLE5VZIw1a cdwc26OGNy3IodLN3dbe3UVPMln7ThWB4MQdRmOvu35MRlL1uvFQoutm6W1gpVACjfJq 6+prvhiGMmY12zYqhPu6hQ/vEFPcdF84HYXPtOHv4ZSCEO5s84+KMXigRuaqwZ9epL/3 gpgiL3PmrzcNv2hDhz7esu9d84hxQKZUZivlAcDdNTdAP7kM/F5UXGvGDY/gmHaWXv4D Y6IKcTbY3xi0/aY0u9c85HvA4aMJ2gytMGuBExsF+lgbvlF+0Mqb0VTFbDUjkbQcFUQZ tK7g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwYdhFt1752tkxKKG2xYd4JJMwfeJYTUSIEhGibwbAFNqQ3m8vw gGxyrF9coU9d/tf3XDQxiNQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG965ibp6p5yjOYf/K+p5O6+zNcPLebuAM+fV2ex4ouVBma2JUIQseJrS8r72RLPqU2LoBQgA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1c82:b0:350:f0bb:6a42 with SMTP id w2-20020a056e021c8200b00350f0bb6a42mr4726890ill.29.1695995003210; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 06:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.31.0.109] ([136.36.130.248]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f20-20020a02b794000000b0043a0d66a80csm5333559jam.24.2023.09.29.06.43.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 29 Sep 2023 06:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1e7f4177-c7a8-4f07-b28b-afe83d64799c@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 07:43:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC] expr: don't clear SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P flag for a promoted subreg [target/111466] Content-Language: en-US To: Roger Sayle , 'Vineet Gupta' , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, 'Robin Dapp' Cc: kito.cheng@gmail.com, 'Palmer Dabbelt' , gnu-toolchain@rivosinc.com, 'Jakub Jelinek' , 'Jivan Hakobyan' References: <20230928214341.257862-1-vineetg@rivosinc.com> <00a801d9f2c1$60028c90$2007a5b0$@nextmovesoftware.com> From: Jeff Law In-Reply-To: <00a801d9f2c1$60028c90$2007a5b0$@nextmovesoftware.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 9/29/23 04:40, Roger Sayle wrote: > > I agree that this looks dubious. Normally, if the middle-end/optimizers > wish to reuse a SUBREG in a context where the flags are not valid, it > should create a new one with the desired flags, rather than "mutate" > an existing (and possibly shared) RTX. SUBREGs aren't shared, though I don't think that changes any of your conclusions. jeff