https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The .rodata duplication should now be gone with the above commit. I've tried --- gcc/varasm.c.jj 2020-08-31 10:26:56.978179325 +0200 +++ gcc/varasm.c 2020-08-31 19:15:34.563274307 +0200 @@ -3818,6 +3818,38 @@ force_const_mem (machine_mode in_mode, r if (!is_a <fixed_size_mode> (in_mode, &mode)) return NULL_RTX; + /* Try to canonicalize CONST_VECTORs. See PR54201. */ + if (GET_CODE (x) == CONST_VECTOR) + { + machine_mode cmode = MIN_MODE_VECTOR_INT; + machine_mode altmode = VOIDmode; + + /* Choose a MODE_VECTOR_INT mode with the same size as in_mode + and as large as possible element, as long as the element is + at most HWI sized (so that CONST_INTs can be used rather + than CONST_DOUBLEs or CONST_WIDE_INTs. */ + FOR_EACH_MODE_FROM (cmode, cmode) + if (known_eq (GET_MODE_SIZE (cmode), GET_MODE_SIZE (in_mode)) + && known_le (GET_MODE_SIZE (GET_MODE_INNER (cmode)), + HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) + && (altmode == VOIDmode + || (GET_MODE_SIZE (GET_MODE_INNER (cmode)) + > GET_MODE_SIZE (GET_MODE_INNER (altmode))))) + altmode = cmode; + if (altmode != VOIDmode && altmode != in_mode) + { + rtx altx = simplify_subreg (altmode, x, in_mode, 0); + if (altx && GET_CODE (altx) == CONST_VECTOR) + { + rtx altret = force_const_mem (altmode, altx); + if (altret) + { + PUT_MODE (altret, in_mode); + return altret; + } + } + } + } /* If we're not allowed to drop X into the constant pool, don't. */ if (targetm.cannot_force_const_mem (mode, x)) return NULL_RTX; as a variant of Richi's patch, but e.g. on typedef int V __attribute__((vector_size (16))); typedef long long int W __attribute__((vector_size (16))); typedef float X __attribute__((vector_size (16))); void foo (V *v, W *w, X *x) { *v += (V) (X) { 2.0f, 2.0f, 2.0f, 2.0f }; *w += (W) (X) { 2.0f, 2.0f, 2.0f, 2.0f }; *x += (X) { 2.0f, 2.0f, 2.0f, 2.0f }; } nothing will really try to share the loads, so the question is if it would gain us anything.