[Bug middle-end/116375] redundant copy not eliminated with CONSTRUCTOR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116375

--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Created attachment 62064
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62064&action=edit
Current patch which does not work

I have some new ideas on how to fix this. more related to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28831#c28 and company.

[Bug middle-end/116375] redundant copy not eliminated with CONSTRUCTOR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116375

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
So even with hacking the verifiers (for now) and getting this in the
.optimized:
```
void g ()
{
   [local count: 1073741824]:
  f ({}); [tail call]
  return;

}
```

We still get a memset and a memcpy. So that is an expand issue.

[Bug middle-end/116375] redundant copy not eliminated with CONSTRUCTOR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116375

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=42909

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski  ---
In this case, with tail calls on aarch64, PR 42909 fixes this specific testcase
but not one without a tail call.

[Bug middle-end/116375] redundant copy not eliminated with CONSTRUCTOR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116375

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |pinskia at gcc dot 
gnu.org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Mine. I filed the dup for myself too.

I was thinking more of allowing `{}` as an argument in gimple and that would
just work.

[Bug middle-end/116375] redundant copy not eliminated with CONSTRUCTOR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116375

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 120549 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/116375] redundant copy not eliminated with CONSTRUCTOR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116375

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Last reconfirmed|2024-08-14 00:00:00 |
   Severity|normal  |enhancement

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Confirmed. I thought I had saw this before too.

[Bug middle-end/116375] redundant copy not eliminated with CONSTRUCTOR

[jason at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116375

Jason Merrill  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2024-08-14
 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
 Ever confirmed|0   |1