This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug rtl-optimization/82524] [7/8 Regression] expensive-optimizations produces wrong results


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82524

--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> (insn 66 37 38 2 (set (reg:SI 0 ax [159])
>         (reg:SI 3 bx [159])) "pr82545.c":27 82 {*movsi_internal}
>      (nil))
> (insn 38 66 39 2 (parallel [
>             (set (zero_extract:SI (reg:SI 0 ax [159])
>                     (const_int 8 [0x8])
>                     (const_int 8 [0x8]))
>                 (subreg:SI (plus:QI (subreg:QI (zero_extract:SI (reg:SI 0 ax
> [159])
>                                 (const_int 8 [0x8])
>                                 (const_int 8 [0x8])) 0)
>                         (subreg:QI (zero_extract:SI (reg:SI 1 dx [163])
>                                 (const_int 8 [0x8])
>                                 (const_int 8 [0x8])) 0)) 0))
>             (clobber (reg:CC 17 flags))
>         ]) "pr82545.c":27 235 {*addqi_ext_2}
>      (nil))

Do we need "+Q" instead of "=Q" on LHS zero_extract patterns?

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]