[Bug target/53447] missed optimization of 64bit ALU operation with small constant
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53447
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Steven Bosscher 2012-05-22
08:24:52 UTC ---
Confirmed.
Here is the assembler output with the "-dAp -fdump-rtl-all-details" options:
t0p:
@ args = 0, pretend = 0, frame = 0
@ frame_needed = 0, uses_anonymous_args = 0
@ link register save eliminated.
@ BLOCK 2 freq:1 seq:0
@ PRED: ENTRY [100.0%] (fallthru)
ldrdr2, [r0]@ 6*arm_movdi/4[length = 8]
push{r4, r5}@ 20*push_multi[length = 2]
movsr4, #1@ 16*thumb2_movsi_shortim[length = 2]
addsr2, r2, r4@ 18*addsi3_compare_op1/1[length = 4]
movr5, #0@ 17*thumb2_movsi_insn/2[length = 4]
adcr3, r3, r5@ 19*addsi3_carryin_ltu[length = 4]
strdr2, [r0]@ 9*arm_movdi/5[length = 8]
@ SUCC: EXIT [100.0%]
pop{r4, r5}
bxlr
The add is a DImode add up to the pr53447.c.195r.postreload dump:
(insn 6 3 13 2 (set (reg:DI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])
(mem:DI (reg/v/f:SI 0 r0 [orig:136 p ] [136]) [2 *p_1(D)+0 S8 A64]))
pr53447.c:3 182 {*arm_movdi}
(nil))
(insn 13 6 8 2 (set (reg:DI 4 r4 [139])
(const_int 1 [0x1])) pr53447.c:3 182 {*arm_movdi}
(expr_list:REG_EQUIV (const_int 1 [0x1])
(nil)))
(insn 8 13 9 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:DI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])
(plus:DI (reg:DI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])
(reg:DI 4 r4 [139])))
(clobber (reg:CC 24 cc))
]) pr53447.c:3 1 {*arm_adddi3}
(nil))
(insn 9 8 12 2 (set (mem:DI (reg/v/f:SI 0 r0 [orig:136 p ] [136]) [2 *p_1(D)+0
S8 A64])
(reg:DI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])) pr53447.c:3 182 {*arm_movdi}
(nil))
The add is split in the pr53447.c.197r.split2 dump:
(insn 6 3 16 2 (set (reg:DI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])
(mem:DI (reg/v/f:SI 0 r0 [orig:136 p ] [136]) [2 *p_1(D)+0 S8 A64]))
pr53447.c:3 182 {*arm_movdi}
(nil))
(insn 16 6 17 2 (set (reg:SI 4 r4 [139])
(const_int 1 [0x1])) pr53447.c:3 718 {*thumb2_movsi_insn}
(nil))
(insn 17 16 18 2 (set (reg:SI 5 r5 [+4 ])
(const_int 0 [0])) pr53447.c:3 718 {*thumb2_movsi_insn}
(nil))
(insn 18 17 19 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:CC_C 24 cc)
(compare:CC_C (plus:SI (reg:SI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])
(reg:SI 4 r4 [139]))
(reg:SI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])))
(set (reg:SI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])
(plus:SI (reg:SI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])
(reg:SI 4 r4 [139])))
]) pr53447.c:3 10 {*addsi3_compare_op1}
(nil))
(insn 19 18 9 2 (set (reg:SI 3 r3 [ D.4118+4 ])
(plus:SI (plus:SI (reg:SI 3 r3 [ D.4118+4 ])
(reg:SI 5 r5 [+4 ]))
(ltu:SI (reg:CC_C 24 cc)
(const_int 0 [0] pr53447.c:3 14 {*addsi3_carryin_ltu}
(nil))
(insn 9 19 12 2 (set (mem:DI (reg/v/f:SI 0 r0 [orig:136 p ] [136]) [2 *p_1(D)+0
S8 A64])
(reg:DI 2 r2 [orig:137 D.4118 ] [137])) pr53447.c:3 182 {*arm_movdi}
(nil))
[Bug c/52862] [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE convert_to_pointer, at convert.c:50
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52862 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work||4.6.4 Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|4.5.4 |4.6.4 Known to fail|4.6.4 |4.6.3 --- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-22 09:18:41 UTC --- Fixed for 4.6.4, I don't intend to backport this further.
[Bug target/53448] New: [avr] ignoring __attribute__((aligned(2)))
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53448 Bug #: 53448 Summary: [avr] ignoring __attribute__((aligned(2))) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: g...@gcc.gnu.org CC: eric.wedding...@atmel.com Target: avr int var __attribute__((aligned(2))) = 1; gets compiled to .globalvar .data .typevar, @object .sizevar, 2 var: .word1 i.e. the alignment directive .p2align 1 is missing.
[Bug target/53448] [avr] ignoring __attribute__((aligned(2)))
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53448 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2012-05-22 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |gjl at gcc dot gnu.org |gnu.org | Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-05-22 08:39:51 UTC --- Created attachment 27474 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27474 C test case More test cases
[Bug c/52952] Wformat location info is bad (wrong column number)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52952
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-22
08:29:08 UTC ---
The format string could be even something like
void f() {
__builtin_printf(
u8R"abcd(%.)abcd"
"*d");
}
So, the question is, if we have a way to find from the source_location on the
ADDR_EXPR around STRING_CST the original non-concatenated tokens, and given
index into the (possibly) translated STRING_CST redo the lexing of those
tokens, looking at which byte in the source tokens maps to that offset in the
STRING_CST.
[Bug tree-optimization/53436] Volatile behaves strange with OpenMP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53436 --- Comment #6 from o.mangold at googlemail dot com 2012-05-22 08:32:03 UTC --- Yes, I get, that it's not a good way to do things, as (among other reasons) a volatile access is no memory fence. So accesses to other locations may not be ordered. But just for the sake of correctness, accesses should be ordered, if they all go to volatile variables, no? From the C99-standard, section 5.1.2.3: > At sequence points, volatile objects are stable in the sense that previous > accesses are complete and subsequent accesses have not yet occurred. This means buffering the reads to the volatile variable over multiple iterations of the while loop is not allowed, or do I get this wrong?
[Bug target/53447] missed optimization of 64bit ALU operation with small constant
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53447 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2012-05-22 Ever Confirmed|0 |1
[Bug target/53192] Incorrect arguments to AVX2's gather intrinsics
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53192 Yukhin Kirill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||areg.melikadamyan at gmail ||dot com --- Comment #3 from Yukhin Kirill 2012-05-22 08:23:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Please provide a testcase to show the problem. I have no idea, which kind of test it should be. These is just MS-ICC-GCC incompatibility issue
[Bug tree-optimization/53436] Volatile behaves strange with OpenMP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53436 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-22 07:59:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > The testcase is not valid OpenMP, there is no flush operation in between the > > store and reads, > > Is that also needed with volatile variables? Would be quite counterintuitive. I believe so. Volatile only makes sure the compiler emits a store of the variable to memory, but the CPU can just store it into a cache. There is nothing that orders that store compared to other stores/loads. So, just use the appropriate OpenMP directives for synchronization, rather than bad attempts at busy waiting using volatile.
[Bug tree-optimization/53436] Volatile behaves strange with OpenMP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53436 --- Comment #4 from o.mangold at googlemail dot com 2012-05-22 07:45:46 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > The testcase is not valid OpenMP, there is no flush operation in between the > store and reads, Is that also needed with volatile variables? Would be quite counterintuitive. > that said, there was a bug on the GCC side that I've fixed. Great, thanks.
[Bug middle-end/53409] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE: vector VEC(vec_void_p,base) index domain error, in vinfo_for_stmt at tree-vectorizer.h:630
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53409 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-22 07:38:01 UTC --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/53410] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1219
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53410 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Component|c |tree-optimization Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-22 07:39:49 UTC --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/53366] [4.7/4.8 Regression] wrong code generation by tree vectorizer using AVX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53366 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.7.1 Summary|wrong code generation by|[4.7/4.8 Regression] wrong |tree vectorizer using AVX |code generation by tree ||vectorizer using AVX --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-22 07:38:53 UTC --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/53436] Volatile behaves strange with OpenMP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53436 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-22 07:37:14 UTC --- The testcase is not valid OpenMP, there is no flush operation in between the store and reads, that said, there was a bug on the GCC side that I've fixed.
[Bug target/53447] New: missed optimization of 64bit ALU operation with small constant
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53447
Bug #: 53447
Summary: missed optimization of 64bit ALU operation with small
constant
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: car...@google.com
Target: arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi
Compile the following code with options -march=armv7-a -O2 -mthumb
void t0p(long long *p)
{
*p += 1;
}
GCC 4.8 generates:
t0p:
ldrdr2, [r0]
push{r4, r5}
movsr4, #1 //A
addsr2, r2, r4 //B
movr5, #0 //C
adcr3, r3, r5 //D
strdr2, [r0]
pop{r4, r5}
bxlr
Instructions ABCD can be simplified as
adds r2, r2, 1
adcr3, r3, 0
This sequence is smaller and faster than original code, it uses two less
registers, so the push/pop instructions can also be removed.
Both arm/thumb mode and Os/O2 generates similar code.
This optimization can also be applied to other alu operations, such as
sub/and/or/xor/cmp.
[Bug bootstrap/49986] Compilation of cross GCC (Linux -> AIX) fails
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49986 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:11:30 UTC --- No feed back in over 4 months so closing. Also IIRC binutils is not fully supported targeting AIX yet.
[Bug bootstrap/50993] IRIX: fails to build in lto for sgi1.0 linker flag
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50993 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:09:42 UTC --- IRIX 6.5 support was removed so closing as won't fix.
[Bug c++/53380] .ehframe could be smaller
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53380 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:01:32 UTC --- Did -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables do what you wanted it to do? In that disable the unwinding tables when not using exceptions?
[Bug bootstrap/40650] gcc-4.5-20090702 won't build on OS X 10.5 with GMP/MPFR in-tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40650 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:13:05 UTC --- No feedback in over 3 months so closing.
[Bug bootstrap/51450] configure's test for -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions broken
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51450 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW
[Bug bootstrap/42666] xgcc: Internal error: segmentation violation (program cc1)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42666 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:12:42 UTC --- No feedback in over 3 months so closing.
[Bug gcov-profile/53406] Unit Record not present in header files or in GCOV output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53406 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 05:57:23 UTC --- function == unit .
[Bug bootstrap/37308] bootstrap hangs in libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37308 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:11:58 UTC --- No feedback in over 4 months so closing.
[Bug bootstrap/49707] GCC sends incorrect flags to native IRIX ld
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49707 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2012-05-22 Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:08:55 UTC --- How was irix-crti.o built from the GCC Log?
[Bug c++/53350] Internal compiler error when compiling boost/smart_ptr/intrusive_ptr.hpp 1.49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53350 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:03:10 UTC --- Fixed as mentioned already.
[Bug gcov-profile/53414] gcov does not generate 'Lines' record for final block of functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53414 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2012-05-22 Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Severity|major |normal --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 05:59:35 UTC --- Can you provide a full testcase that is runnable? Also does this happen with newer versions of GCC?
[Bug bootstrap/49707] GCC sends incorrect flags to native IRIX ld
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49707 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-22 06:10:04 UTC --- IRIX 6.5 support was removed so closing as won't fix.
[Bug tree-optimization/53438] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bitfield store replaced with full-byte store
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53438 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.2 |4.7.1
[Bug c++/53380] .ehframe could be smaller
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53380 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2012-05-22 Ever Confirmed|0 |1
