From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7AC5A3858D38 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 13:40:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 7AC5A3858D38 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 7AC5A3858D38 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=195.135.223.130 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1704894056; cv=none; b=lIPgIfUKkWpa9E7MUP10jW4DmrdJ8t+Hw7L1mYXpaOTJrjSlAmwHpVInq65ceoowlf+S3CljAXq8XHrWqsRgZyBncuhuAzTraJ5Pelpjgd8af/Clck0an7HxjNnWYAruHsCkg4rsGZJv2wt8gqbY+r582w2rcWjKvNt6BY3gEfM= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1704894056; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YpxAqZ6IBkNrtCdDPP/qi7IsaUyqZWmkdmMWBvbmc+Q=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:Date: From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=oSGKlDNtF0rvbqgsslA8T6rdPohABgjCO5HkI+Mi4Qg1rn6dkHF9f/VfV5pErvcAH+pBoWec/ak9NRLRs2zrhDGwFwM3ED0XuRLmO/dw/QaQcTIwllBO2u6H3FyU6svepLKwYTYgi7YfQPyfQ6C4fQhWOHDbXpEr+BDrkpgkyhM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from [10.168.4.150] (unknown [10.168.4.150]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BEFB221D1; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 13:40:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1704894052; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Z5LEJ34SUxAZIT9AQ5sNnJolZ7fTNe/HT7hAOu2NQ4c=; b=FD/Hn/xkuhZhKGDDmVs7mhJAnpM/7zFcD02eqs+Ma8Kv1KG2PH3sojCtcg7dshA0Yomjap E6RlrqNFqXzWVSWf2dZpM7OCufG/y9Z7yrKoT73JeNTF5Er1EXRfBlK9qDa4irRkuF13Zm TYAPd/4bPlMPGeN6+NERrqu7+DjMsHM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1704894052; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Z5LEJ34SUxAZIT9AQ5sNnJolZ7fTNe/HT7hAOu2NQ4c=; b=+lPZVrGO1pAEYFpzZt/faAd/LcnQsbZqKcf9EvPV2XkYuxvm68zYo1rEdz1CJ/bzZoRef4 QYVXics8g1/iJECQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1704894052; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Z5LEJ34SUxAZIT9AQ5sNnJolZ7fTNe/HT7hAOu2NQ4c=; b=FD/Hn/xkuhZhKGDDmVs7mhJAnpM/7zFcD02eqs+Ma8Kv1KG2PH3sojCtcg7dshA0Yomjap E6RlrqNFqXzWVSWf2dZpM7OCufG/y9Z7yrKoT73JeNTF5Er1EXRfBlK9qDa4irRkuF13Zm TYAPd/4bPlMPGeN6+NERrqu7+DjMsHM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1704894052; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Z5LEJ34SUxAZIT9AQ5sNnJolZ7fTNe/HT7hAOu2NQ4c=; b=+lPZVrGO1pAEYFpzZt/faAd/LcnQsbZqKcf9EvPV2XkYuxvm68zYo1rEdz1CJ/bzZoRef4 QYVXics8g1/iJECQ== Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:35:52 +0100 (CET) From: Richard Biener To: Richard Sandiford cc: Jeff Law , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, jlaw@ventanamicro.com, rdapp.gcc@gmail.com, jakub@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a late-combine pass [PR106594] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9s771497-p7p7-03p0-s417-96qqo9q917n0@fhfr.qr> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spamd-Result: default: False [4.07 / 50.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[6]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(2.67)[0.891]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com,gcc.gnu.org,ventanamicro.com,redhat.com]; BAYES_HAM(-0.00)[38.09%]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[] X-Spam-Score: 4.07 Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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 Wed, 10 Jan 2024, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Just a note that, following discussion on IRC, I'll pull this for > GCC 14 and resubmit for GCC 15. > > There was also pushback on IRC about making the pass opt-in. > Enabling it for x86_64 would mean fixing RPAD to use a representation > that is more robust against recombination, but as you can imagine, it's > kind-of difficult for me to justify spending significant time fixing an > issue in the x86_64 port. Jeff's testing suggested that there are also > latent issues in the older, less maintained ports. > > So to get an idea for expectations: would it be a requirement that a > GCC 15 submission is enabled unconditionally and all known issues in > the ports fixed? Can you open a bugreport with the issue in RPAD, maybe outlining what would need to be done? I think x86 maintainers could opt to disable the pass - so it would be opt-out. It's reasonable to expect them to fix the backend given there's nothing really wrong with the new pass, it just does something that wasn't done before at that point? Richard.