[PATCH PR62151]Fix REG_DEAD note distribution issue by using right ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1

[PATCH PR62151]Fix REG_DEAD note distribution issue by using right ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1

[Bin Cheng]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 859 bytes --]

Hi,
As described both in the PR and patch comments, this patch fixes PR62151 by
setting right value to ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1 when distributing REG_DEAD notes from
i0/i1.  It is said that distribute_notes had caused many bugs in the past.
I think it still has bug in it, as noted in the PR.  This patch doesn't
touch distribute_notes because we are in stage3 and I want to have more
discussion on it.
Bootstrap and test on x86_64.  aarch64 is ongoing.  So is it ok?

2014-12-11  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>

	PR rtl-optimization/62151
	* combine.c (try_combine): Reset elim_i0 and elim_i1 when
	distributing notes from i0notes or i1notes, this time don't
	check whether newi2pat sets i1dest or i0dest.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2014-12-11  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>

	PR rtl-optimization/62151
	* gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c: New test.

[-- Attachment #2: pr62151-20141211.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2894 bytes --]

Index: gcc/combine.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/combine.c	(revision 218200)
+++ gcc/combine.c	(working copy)
@@ -4183,11 +4183,42 @@ try_combine (rtx_insn *i3, rtx_insn *i2, rtx_insn
       distribute_notes (i2notes, i2, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
 			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
     if (i1notes)
-      distribute_notes (i1notes, i1, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
-			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
+      {
+	/* When distributing REG_DEAD note from i1, it doesn't matter
+	   if newi2pat sets i1dest/i0dest or not.  Recompute and use
+	   elim_i0/elim_i1 in temp variables.
+
+	   See PR62151, if we have four insns combination:
+	     i0: r0 <- i0src
+	     i1: r1 <- i1src (using r0)
+		       REG_DEAD (r0)
+	     i2: r0 <- i2src (using r1)
+	     i3: r3 <- i3src (using r0)
+	     ix: using r0
+	   From i1's point of view, r0 is eliminated, no matter if it is
+	   set by newi2pat or not.  In other words, REG_DEAD info for r0
+	   in i1 should be discarded.
+
+	   Note this only affects cases in which I2 is after I0/I1, like
+	   "I1->I2->I3", "I0->I1->I2->I3" or "I0&I1->I2, I2->I3".  For
+	   other cases like "I0->I1, I1&I2->I3" or "I1&I2->I3", newi2pat
+	   will not set i1dest or i0dest.  */
+	rtx tmp_elim_i1 = (i1 == 0 || i1dest_in_i1src || i1dest_in_i0src
+			   || !i1dest_killed
+			   ? 0 : i1dest);
+	rtx tmp_elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src || !i0dest_killed
+			   ? 0 : i0dest);
+	distribute_notes (i1notes, i1, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
+			  elim_i2, tmp_elim_i1, tmp_elim_i0);
+      }
     if (i0notes)
-      distribute_notes (i0notes, i0, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
-			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
+      {
+	/* Same with distribution of i1notes.  */
+	rtx tmp_elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src || !i0dest_killed
+			   ? 0 : i0dest);
+	distribute_notes (i0notes, i0, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
+			  elim_i2, elim_i1, tmp_elim_i0);
+      }
     if (midnotes)
       distribute_notes (midnotes, NULL, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
 			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c	(revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c	(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+/* PR rtl-optimization/62151 */
+
+int a, c, d, e, f, g, h, i;
+short b;
+
+int
+fn1 ()
+{
+  b = 0;
+  for (;;)
+    {
+      int j[2];
+      j[f] = 0;
+      if (h)
+	d = 0;
+      else
+	{
+	  for (; f; f++)
+	    ;
+	  for (a = 0; a < 1; a++)
+	    for (;;)
+	      {
+		i = b & ((b ^ 1) & 83647) ? b : b - 1;
+		g = 1 ? i : 0;
+		e = j[0];
+		if (c)
+		  break;
+		return 0;
+	      }
+	}
+    }
+}
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+  fn1 ();
+  if (g != -1)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+  return 0;
+}

Re: [PATCH PR62151]Fix REG_DEAD note distribution issue by using right ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1

[Eric Botcazou]

> As described both in the PR and patch comments, this patch fixes PR62151 by
> setting right value to ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1 when distributing REG_DEAD notes from
> i0/i1.  It is said that distribute_notes had caused many bugs in the past.
> I think it still has bug in it, as noted in the PR.  This patch doesn't
> touch distribute_notes because we are in stage3 and I want to have more
> discussion on it.
> Bootstrap and test on x86_64.  aarch64 is ongoing.  So is it ok?
> 
> 2014-12-11  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>
> 
> 	PR rtl-optimization/62151
> 	* combine.c (try_combine): Reset elim_i0 and elim_i1 when
> 	distributing notes from i0notes or i1notes, this time don't
> 	check whether newi2pat sets i1dest or i0dest.

The reasoning looks correct to me and the patch is certainly safe so it's OK 
on principle, but I think that we should avoid the duplication of predicates.

Can you move the computation of the alternative elim_i1 & elim_i0 up to where 
the original ones are computed along with the explanation of why we care about 
newi2pat only for notes that were on I3 and I2?  Something like:

   /* Compute which registers we expect to eliminate.  newi2pat may be setting
      either i3dest or i2dest, so we must check it.  */
    rtx elim_i2 = ((newi2pat && reg_set_p (i2dest, newi2pat))
		   || i2dest_in_i2src || i2dest_in_i1src || i2dest_in_i0src
		   || !i2dest_killed
		   ? 0 : i2dest);
   /* For I1 we need to compute both local elimination and global elimination
      because i1dest may be the same as i3dest, in which case newi2pat may be
      setting i1dest.  <big explanation of why this is needed>  */
    rtx local_elim_i1 = (i1 == 0 || i1dest_in_i1src || i1dest_in_i0src
		   || !i1dest_killed
		   ? 0 : i1dest);
    rtx elim_i1 = (local_elim_i1 == 0
		   || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i1dest, newi2pat))
		   ? 0 : i1dest);
    /* Likewise for I0.  */
    rtx local_elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src
		   || !i0dest_killed
		   ? 0 : i0dest);
    rtx elim_i0 = (local_elim_i0 == 0
		   || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i0dest, newi2pat))
		   ? 0 : i0dest);

-- 
Eric Botcazou

Re: [PATCH PR62151]Fix REG_DEAD note distribution issue by using right ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1

[Bin.Cheng]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2993 bytes --]

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> wrote:
>> As described both in the PR and patch comments, this patch fixes PR62151 by
>> setting right value to ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1 when distributing REG_DEAD notes from
>> i0/i1.  It is said that distribute_notes had caused many bugs in the past.
>> I think it still has bug in it, as noted in the PR.  This patch doesn't
>> touch distribute_notes because we are in stage3 and I want to have more
>> discussion on it.
>> Bootstrap and test on x86_64.  aarch64 is ongoing.  So is it ok?
>>
>> 2014-12-11  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>
>>
>>       PR rtl-optimization/62151
>>       * combine.c (try_combine): Reset elim_i0 and elim_i1 when
>>       distributing notes from i0notes or i1notes, this time don't
>>       check whether newi2pat sets i1dest or i0dest.
>
> The reasoning looks correct to me and the patch is certainly safe so it's OK
> on principle, but I think that we should avoid the duplication of predicates.
>
> Can you move the computation of the alternative elim_i1 & elim_i0 up to where
> the original ones are computed along with the explanation of why we care about
> newi2pat only for notes that were on I3 and I2?  Something like:
>
>    /* Compute which registers we expect to eliminate.  newi2pat may be setting
>       either i3dest or i2dest, so we must check it.  */
>     rtx elim_i2 = ((newi2pat && reg_set_p (i2dest, newi2pat))
>                    || i2dest_in_i2src || i2dest_in_i1src || i2dest_in_i0src
>                    || !i2dest_killed
>                    ? 0 : i2dest);
>    /* For I1 we need to compute both local elimination and global elimination
>       because i1dest may be the same as i3dest, in which case newi2pat may be
>       setting i1dest.  <big explanation of why this is needed>  */
>     rtx local_elim_i1 = (i1 == 0 || i1dest_in_i1src || i1dest_in_i0src
>                    || !i1dest_killed
>                    ? 0 : i1dest);
>     rtx elim_i1 = (local_elim_i1 == 0
>                    || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i1dest, newi2pat))
>                    ? 0 : i1dest);
>     /* Likewise for I0.  */
>     rtx local_elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src
>                    || !i0dest_killed
>                    ? 0 : i0dest);
>     rtx elim_i0 = (local_elim_i0 == 0
>                    || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i0dest, newi2pat))
>                    ? 0 : i0dest);
>
> --
> Eric Botcazou

Hi Eric,
Thanks for reviewing.  Here comes the revised patch.  Bootstrap and
test on x86_64, is it OK?

Thanks,
bin


2014-12-22  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>

    PR rtl-optimization/62151
    * combine.c (try_combine): New local variables local_elim_i1
    and local_elim_i0.  Set elim_i1 and elim_i0 using the local
    version variables.  Distribute notes from i0notes or i1notes
    using the local variavbles.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2014-12-22  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>

    PR rtl-optimization/62151
    * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c: New test.

[-- Attachment #2: pr62151-20141222.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3902 bytes --]

Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c	(revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c	(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+/* PR rtl-optimization/62151 */
+
+int a, c, d, e, f, g, h, i;
+short b;
+
+int
+fn1 ()
+{
+  b = 0;
+  for (;;)
+    {
+      int j[2];
+      j[f] = 0;
+      if (h)
+	d = 0;
+      else
+	{
+	  for (; f; f++)
+	    ;
+	  for (a = 0; a < 1; a++)
+	    for (;;)
+	      {
+		i = b & ((b ^ 1) & 83647) ? b : b - 1;
+		g = 1 ? i : 0;
+		e = j[0];
+		if (c)
+		  break;
+		return 0;
+	      }
+	}
+    }
+}
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+  fn1 ();
+  if (g != -1)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+  return 0;
+}
Index: gcc/combine.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/combine.c	(revision 218855)
+++ gcc/combine.c	(working copy)
@@ -4119,19 +4119,46 @@ try_combine (rtx_insn *i3, rtx_insn *i2, rtx_insn
     rtx midnotes = 0;
     int from_luid;
     /* Compute which registers we expect to eliminate.  newi2pat may be setting
-       either i3dest or i2dest, so we must check it.  Also, i1dest may be the
-       same as i3dest, in which case newi2pat may be setting i1dest.  */
+       either i3dest or i2dest, so we must check it.  */
     rtx elim_i2 = ((newi2pat && reg_set_p (i2dest, newi2pat))
 		   || i2dest_in_i2src || i2dest_in_i1src || i2dest_in_i0src
 		   || !i2dest_killed
 		   ? 0 : i2dest);
-    rtx elim_i1 = (i1 == 0 || i1dest_in_i1src || i1dest_in_i0src
+    /* For i1, we need to compute both local elimination and global
+       elimination information with respect to newi2pat because i1dest
+       may be the same as i3dest, in which case newi2pat may be setting
+       i1dest.  Global information is used when distributing REG_DEAD
+       note for i2 and i3, in which case it does matter if newi2pat sets
+       i1dest or not.
+
+       Local information is used when distributing REG_DEAD note for i1,
+       in which case it doesn't matter if newi2pat sets i1dest or not.
+       See PR62151, if we have four insns combination:
+	   i0: r0 <- i0src
+	   i1: r1 <- i1src (using r0)
+		     REG_DEAD (r0)
+	   i2: r0 <- i2src (using r1)
+	   i3: r3 <- i3src (using r0)
+	   ix: using r0
+       From i1's point of view, r0 is eliminated, no matter if it is set
+       by newi2pat or not.  In other words, REG_DEAD info for r0 in i1
+       should be discarded.
+
+       Note local information only affects cases in which I2 is after I0/I1,
+       like "I1->I2->I3", "I0->I1->I2->I3" or "I0&I1->I2, I2->I3".  For other
+       cases like "I0->I1, I1&I2->I3" or "I1&I2->I3", newi2pat will not set
+       i1dest or i0dest.  */
+    rtx local_elim_i1 = (i1 == 0 || i1dest_in_i1src || i1dest_in_i0src
+			 || !i1dest_killed
+			 ? 0 : i1dest);
+    rtx elim_i1 = (local_elim_i1 == 0
 		   || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i1dest, newi2pat))
-		   || !i1dest_killed
 		   ? 0 : i1dest);
-    rtx elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src
+    /* Same case as i1.  */
+    rtx local_elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src || !i0dest_killed
+			 ? 0 : i0dest);
+    rtx elim_i0 = (local_elim_i0 == 0
 		   || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i0dest, newi2pat))
-		   || !i0dest_killed
 		   ? 0 : i0dest);
 
     /* Get the old REG_NOTES and LOG_LINKS from all our insns and
@@ -4300,10 +4327,10 @@ try_combine (rtx_insn *i3, rtx_insn *i2, rtx_insn
 			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
     if (i1notes)
       distribute_notes (i1notes, i1, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
-			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
+			elim_i2, local_elim_i1, local_elim_i0);
     if (i0notes)
       distribute_notes (i0notes, i0, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
-			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
+			elim_i2, elim_i1, local_elim_i0);
     if (midnotes)
       distribute_notes (midnotes, NULL, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
 			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);

Re: [PATCH PR62151]Fix REG_DEAD note distribution issue by using right ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1

[Bin.Cheng]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3307 bytes --]

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Bin.Cheng <amker.cheng@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> wrote:
>>> As described both in the PR and patch comments, this patch fixes PR62151 by
>>> setting right value to ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1 when distributing REG_DEAD notes from
>>> i0/i1.  It is said that distribute_notes had caused many bugs in the past.
>>> I think it still has bug in it, as noted in the PR.  This patch doesn't
>>> touch distribute_notes because we are in stage3 and I want to have more
>>> discussion on it.
>>> Bootstrap and test on x86_64.  aarch64 is ongoing.  So is it ok?
>>>
>>> 2014-12-11  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>
>>>
>>>       PR rtl-optimization/62151
>>>       * combine.c (try_combine): Reset elim_i0 and elim_i1 when
>>>       distributing notes from i0notes or i1notes, this time don't
>>>       check whether newi2pat sets i1dest or i0dest.
>>
>> The reasoning looks correct to me and the patch is certainly safe so it's OK
>> on principle, but I think that we should avoid the duplication of predicates.
>>
>> Can you move the computation of the alternative elim_i1 & elim_i0 up to where
>> the original ones are computed along with the explanation of why we care about
>> newi2pat only for notes that were on I3 and I2?  Something like:
>>
>>    /* Compute which registers we expect to eliminate.  newi2pat may be setting
>>       either i3dest or i2dest, so we must check it.  */
>>     rtx elim_i2 = ((newi2pat && reg_set_p (i2dest, newi2pat))
>>                    || i2dest_in_i2src || i2dest_in_i1src || i2dest_in_i0src
>>                    || !i2dest_killed
>>                    ? 0 : i2dest);
>>    /* For I1 we need to compute both local elimination and global elimination
>>       because i1dest may be the same as i3dest, in which case newi2pat may be
>>       setting i1dest.  <big explanation of why this is needed>  */
>>     rtx local_elim_i1 = (i1 == 0 || i1dest_in_i1src || i1dest_in_i0src
>>                    || !i1dest_killed
>>                    ? 0 : i1dest);
>>     rtx elim_i1 = (local_elim_i1 == 0
>>                    || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i1dest, newi2pat))
>>                    ? 0 : i1dest);
>>     /* Likewise for I0.  */
>>     rtx local_elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src
>>                    || !i0dest_killed
>>                    ? 0 : i0dest);
>>     rtx elim_i0 = (local_elim_i0 == 0
>>                    || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i0dest, newi2pat))
>>                    ? 0 : i0dest);
>>
>> --
>> Eric Botcazou
>
> Hi Eric,
> Thanks for reviewing.  Here comes the revised patch.  Bootstrap and
> test on x86_64, is it OK?
>
> Thanks,
> bin
>
>
> 2014-12-22  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>
>
>     PR rtl-optimization/62151
>     * combine.c (try_combine): New local variables local_elim_i1
>     and local_elim_i0.  Set elim_i1 and elim_i0 using the local
>     version variables.  Distribute notes from i0notes or i1notes
>     using the local variavbles.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> 2014-12-22  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>
>
>     PR rtl-optimization/62151
>     * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c: New test.

Hmm, I further revised comment in the patch since in try_combine, i2
is always after i0/i1.  The original comment is inaccurate about that.

Thanks,
bin

[-- Attachment #2: pr62151-20141222-1.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3887 bytes --]

Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c	(revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c	(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+/* PR rtl-optimization/62151 */
+
+int a, c, d, e, f, g, h, i;
+short b;
+
+int
+fn1 ()
+{
+  b = 0;
+  for (;;)
+    {
+      int j[2];
+      j[f] = 0;
+      if (h)
+	d = 0;
+      else
+	{
+	  for (; f; f++)
+	    ;
+	  for (a = 0; a < 1; a++)
+	    for (;;)
+	      {
+		i = b & ((b ^ 1) & 83647) ? b : b - 1;
+		g = 1 ? i : 0;
+		e = j[0];
+		if (c)
+		  break;
+		return 0;
+	      }
+	}
+    }
+}
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+  fn1 ();
+  if (g != -1)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+  return 0;
+}
Index: gcc/combine.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/combine.c	(revision 218855)
+++ gcc/combine.c	(working copy)
@@ -4119,19 +4119,46 @@ try_combine (rtx_insn *i3, rtx_insn *i2, rtx_insn
     rtx midnotes = 0;
     int from_luid;
     /* Compute which registers we expect to eliminate.  newi2pat may be setting
-       either i3dest or i2dest, so we must check it.  Also, i1dest may be the
-       same as i3dest, in which case newi2pat may be setting i1dest.  */
+       either i3dest or i2dest, so we must check it.  */
     rtx elim_i2 = ((newi2pat && reg_set_p (i2dest, newi2pat))
 		   || i2dest_in_i2src || i2dest_in_i1src || i2dest_in_i0src
 		   || !i2dest_killed
 		   ? 0 : i2dest);
-    rtx elim_i1 = (i1 == 0 || i1dest_in_i1src || i1dest_in_i0src
+    /* For i1, we need to compute both local elimination and global
+       elimination information with respect to newi2pat because i1dest
+       may be the same as i3dest, in which case newi2pat may be setting
+       i1dest.  Global information is used when distributing REG_DEAD
+       note for i2 and i3, in which case it does matter if newi2pat sets
+       i1dest or not.
+
+       Local information is used when distributing REG_DEAD note for i1,
+       in which case it doesn't matter if newi2pat sets i1dest or not.
+       See PR62151, if we have four insns combination:
+	   i0: r0 <- i0src
+	   i1: r1 <- i1src (using r0)
+		     REG_DEAD (r0)
+	   i2: r0 <- i2src (using r1)
+	   i3: r3 <- i3src (using r0)
+	   ix: using r0
+       From i1's point of view, r0 is eliminated, no matter if it is set
+       by newi2pat or not.  In other words, REG_DEAD info for r0 in i1
+       should be discarded.
+
+       Note local information only affects cases in forms like "I1->I2->I3",
+       "I0->I1->I2->I3" or "I0&I1->I2, I2->I3".  For other cases like
+       "I0->I1, I1&I2->I3" or "I1&I2->I3", newi2pat won't set i1dest or
+       i0dest anyway.  */
+    rtx local_elim_i1 = (i1 == 0 || i1dest_in_i1src || i1dest_in_i0src
+			 || !i1dest_killed
+			 ? 0 : i1dest);
+    rtx elim_i1 = (local_elim_i1 == 0
 		   || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i1dest, newi2pat))
-		   || !i1dest_killed
 		   ? 0 : i1dest);
-    rtx elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src
+    /* Same case as i1.  */
+    rtx local_elim_i0 = (i0 == 0 || i0dest_in_i0src || !i0dest_killed
+			 ? 0 : i0dest);
+    rtx elim_i0 = (local_elim_i0 == 0
 		   || (newi2pat && reg_set_p (i0dest, newi2pat))
-		   || !i0dest_killed
 		   ? 0 : i0dest);
 
     /* Get the old REG_NOTES and LOG_LINKS from all our insns and
@@ -4300,10 +4327,10 @@ try_combine (rtx_insn *i3, rtx_insn *i2, rtx_insn
 			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
     if (i1notes)
       distribute_notes (i1notes, i1, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
-			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
+			elim_i2, local_elim_i1, local_elim_i0);
     if (i0notes)
       distribute_notes (i0notes, i0, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
-			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);
+			elim_i2, elim_i1, local_elim_i0);
     if (midnotes)
       distribute_notes (midnotes, NULL, i3, newi2pat ? i2 : NULL,
 			elim_i2, elim_i1, elim_i0);

Re: [PATCH PR62151]Fix REG_DEAD note distribution issue by using right ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1

[Eric Botcazou]

> Hmm, I further revised comment in the patch since in try_combine, i2
> is always after i0/i1.  The original comment is inaccurate about that.

OK.

-- 
Eric Botcazou

Re: [PATCH PR62151]Fix REG_DEAD note distribution issue by using right ELIM_I0/ELIM_I1

[Eric Botcazou]

> 2014-12-22  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>
> 
>     PR rtl-optimization/62151
>     * combine.c (try_combine): New local variables local_elim_i1
>     and local_elim_i0.  Set elim_i1 and elim_i0 using the local
>     version variables.  Distribute notes from i0notes or i1notes
>     using the local variavbles.
> 
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> 2014-12-22  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>
> 
>     PR rtl-optimization/62151
>     * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr62151.c: New test.

OK, thanks.

-- 
Eric Botcazou