On 03/05/2024 15:45, Alex Coplan wrote: > This fixes a typo in combine_reg_notes in the load/store pair fusion > pass. As it stands, the calls to filter_notes store any > REG_FRAME_RELATED_EXPR to fr_expr with the following association: > > - i2 -> fr_expr[0] > - i1 -> fr_expr[1] > > but then the checks inside the following if statement expect the > opposite (more natural) association, i.e.: > > - i2 -> fr_expr[1] > - i1 -> fr_expr[0] > > this patch fixes the oversight by swapping the fr_expr indices in the > calls to filter_notes. > > In hindsight it would probably have been less confusing / error-prone to > have combine_reg_notes take an array of two insns, then we wouldn't have > to mix 1-based and 0-based indexing as well as remembering to call > filter_notes in reverse program order. This however is a minimal fix > for backporting purposes. > > Many thanks to Matthew for spotting this typo and pointing it out to me. > > Bootstrapped/regtested on aarch64-linux-gnu, OK for trunk and the 14 > branch after the 14.1 release? > > Thanks, > Alex > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > PR target/114936 > * config/aarch64/aarch64-ldp-fusion.cc (combine_reg_notes): > Ensure insn iN has its REG_FRAME_RELATED_EXPR (if any) stored in > FR_EXPR[N-1], thus matching the correspondence expected by the > copy_rtx calls.
OK. R.
