On 08/01/2016 12:52 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
Hi Jeff,
On 08/01/16 19:54, Jeff Law wrote:
> Looks like you've probably nailed it. It'll be interesting see if
> there's any fallout (though our RTL optimizer testing is pretty weak, so
> even if there were, I doubt we'd catch it).
>
If there is, it will probably a performance regression...
Anyway I'd say these two patches do just disable actually wrong
transformations. So here are both patches as separate diffs
with your suggestion for the comment in cse_insn.
I believe that on x86_64 both patches do not change a single bit.
However I think there are more paradoxical subregs generated all over,
but the aarch64 insv code pattern did trigger more hidden bugs than
any other port. It is certainly unfortunate that the major source
of paradoxical subreg is in a target-dependent code path :(
Please apologize that I am not able to reduce/finalize the aarch64 test
case at this time, as I usually only work with arm and intel targets,
but I made an exception here, because a bug like that may affect all
targets sooner or later.
Boot-strap and reg-testing on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Plus aarch64 bootstrap and isl-testing by Andreas.
Is it OK for trunk?
cse.c changes look good, but I'd really like to see a testcase for each
issue in the dejagnu framework. Extra points if you tried to build a
unit test using David M's framework, but that isn't required.
The testcase from 70903 ought to be trivial to add to the dejagnu suite.
71779 might be more difficult, but if you could take a stab, it'd be
appreciated.
jeff
