https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #5 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
REG_EQ* is documented as only being allowed on insns that set only one
register. If you want to change that, you'll have to check *all* code
that consumes this, see if they rely on that fact or not, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> REG_EQ* is documented as only being allowed on insns that set only one
> register. If you want to change that, you'll have to check *all* cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
"clobber" is a red herring; it is impossible to make a REG_EQ* note for
a clobber, a clobber does not set a new value (that is the whole point
of a clobber).
I think we could allow auto-modify, sure, ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Oh, and ideally, we would replace the whole REG_EQ* stuff with a more
powerful interface that is to-the-side, not embedded in the instruction
stream. For known exact values, nonzero_bits, known ranges,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #11 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #9)
> "clobber" is a red herring; it is impossible to make a REG_EQ* note for
> a clobber, a clobber does not set a new value (that is the whole po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
Since Richard kindly invited me to the party, I feel entitled to voice my
personal opinion :-) which is apparently aligned with Richard's. I think that
we should allow REG_EQUAL notes for insns with exactly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So, hrm, we could in principle attach a REG_EQ* note to any single_set
instruction?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou ---
> So, hrm, we could in principle attach a REG_EQ* note to any single_set
> instruction?
Yes, I think that's what is currently implemented modulo bugs, although of
course we do not create a REG_EQUAL note fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ok, so what we do about this bug then if it ought to be combine.c that needs
changing? For REG_EQUAL notes in combine_instructions check for the
auto-incdec side-effects in the pattern (I'd hope we don't ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Ok, so what we do about this bug then if it ought to be combine.c that needs
> changing? For REG_EQUAL notes in combine_instructions check for the
> auto-incdec side-effects in the pattern (I'd hope we do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 48451
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48451&action=edit
gcc11-pr94873.patch
Untested patch then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #19 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #18)
> Created attachment 48451 [details]
> gcc11-pr94873.patch
>
> Untested patch then.
This one-liner is pre-approved. Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94873
--- Comment #20 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f14848aea70066777faf201c0b6eb3c5520bfab9
commit r11-127-gf14848aea70066777faf201c0b6eb3c5520bfab9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: We
17 matches
Mail list logo
