https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95669
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |middle-end
Target||x86_64-*-*
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-15
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
with 'dummy' and the implicit zero initialization of it we retain
[local count: 1073741824]:
if (a_3(D) < b_4(D))
goto ; [50.00%]
else
goto ; [50.00%]
[local count: 536870913]:
D.2350 = {};
goto ; [100.00%]
[local count: 536870913]:
_1 = a_3(D) * b_4(D);
D.2350.val = _1;
MEM [(void *) + 4B] = 1;
[local count: 1073741824]:
return D.2350;
wich generates straigt-forward code while with 'dummy' elided we manage
to completely scalarize things and do
[local count: 1073741824]:
if (a_3(D) < b_4(D))
goto ; [50.00%]
else
goto ; [50.00%]
[local count: 536870913]:
_1 = a_3(D) * b_4(D);
[local count: 1073741824]:
# cstore_11 = PHI <_1(3), 0(2)>
# cstore_10 = PHI <1(3), 0(2)>
D.2349.ok = cstore_10;
D.2349.val = cstore_11;
return D.2349;
which is basically two conditional moves we expand via strange bit
shufflings because D.2349 (struct res) is assigned a register.