https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100182
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- They do. Though, in the combined patch I'm still a little bit worried about the first 4 modified peephole2s, the last 4 look good to me. The last 4 are where the original insn did a normal DFmode store and your patch restores those DFmode stores. But the first 4 had an atomic store followed by a DFmode read, shouldn't those preserve an atomic store instead of the DFmode store? A non-atomic DFmode read is one thing, but it could be followed later by atomic loads, both into DFmode and ones into DImode that would check the whole bit pattern.
