[Bug target/92149] Enefficient x86_64 code

2020-01-29 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92149 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/92149] Enefficient x86_64 code

2019-10-18 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92149 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug target/92149] Enefficient x86_64 code

2019-10-18 Thread maxim.yegorushkin at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92149 --- Comment #3 from Maxim Egorushkin --- System V ABI doesn't seem to require unused bytes to contain any specific value. There is a specific note for _Bool: When a value of type _Bool is returned or passed in a register or on the stack, bit 0 c

[Bug target/92149] Enefficient x86_64 code

2019-10-18 Thread maxim.yegorushkin at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92149 --- Comment #2 from Maxim Egorushkin --- I notice that g++ always zeros out unused high-order bits. Clang++ never does. Both follow the same System V ABI.

[Bug target/92149] Enefficient x86_64 code

2019-10-18 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92149 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ABI, missed-optimization --- Comment #1