Re: PING: PATCH: PR rtl-optimization/38272:

[Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov at redhat dot com>]

H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
>   
> > "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >     
> > > IRA exposed a latent reload bug where do_input_reload use a register
> > > spill for a memory input and the spilled register is diferent from
> > > the register to be reloaded into. It generates wrong code.  A patch is
> > > posted at:
> > >
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg01463.html
> > >
> > > Is that OK for mainline?
> > >       
> > I don't see that that conditional serves any purpose any more.  I
> > would try simply deleting this block of code entirely:
> >
> >  /* When inheriting a wider reload, we have a MEM in rl->in,
> >     e.g. inheriting a SImode output reload for
> >     (mem:HI (plus:SI (reg:SI 14 fp) (const_int 10)))  */
> >  if (optimize && reload_inherited[j] && rl->in
> >      && MEM_P (rl->in)
> >      && MEM_P (rl->in_reg)
> >      && reload_spill_index[j] >= 0
> >      && TEST_HARD_REG_BIT (reg_reloaded_valid, reload_spill_index[j]))
> >    rl->in = regno_reg_rtx[reg_reloaded_contents[reload_spill_index[j]]];
> >
> > It would certainly be interesting to hear what it does affect.  That
> > code was introduced before we had any equivalent of the reg_rtx field
> > in struct reload.
> >
> >     
>
> I will remove this block of code on ira-merge branch. I will run
> SPEC CPU 2K/2006 on Linux/ia32 and Linux/Intel64 to
> see if there are any performance impacts.
>
>   
I am sorry, HJ.  I think you missed Bernd's patch.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-12/msg00172.html

If it works, it is more right solution imho and Bernd's patch is 
automatically approved because Bernd is a reload maintainer.