[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #15 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 13:11 --- Subject: Bug 43360 Author: hjl Date: Thu Mar 18 13:10:49 2010 New Revision: 157539 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157539 Log: Remove the REG_EQUAL note if we don't know its invariant status. gcc/ 2010-03-18 Steven Bosscher ste...@gcc.gnu.org Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com PR rtl-optimization/43360 * loop-invariant.c (move_invariant_reg): Remove the REG_EQUAL note if we don't know its invariant status. gcc/testsuite/ 2010-03-18 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com PR rtl-optimization/43360 * gcc.dg/torture/pr43360.c: New. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr43360.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/loop-invariant.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #16 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 13:13 --- Subject: Bug 43360 Author: hjl Date: Thu Mar 18 13:13:42 2010 New Revision: 157540 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157540 Log: Remove the REG_EQUAL note if we don't know its invariant status. gcc/ 2010-03-18 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com Backport from mainline: 2010-03-18 Steven Bosscher ste...@gcc.gnu.org Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com PR rtl-optimization/43360 * loop-invariant.c (move_invariant_reg): Remove the REG_EQUAL note if we don't know its invariant status. gcc/testsuite/ 2010-03-18 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com Backport from mainline: 2010-03-18 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com PR rtl-optimization/43360 * gcc.dg/torture/pr43360.c: New. Added: branches/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr43360.c - copied unchanged from r157539, trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr43360.c Modified: branches/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/loop-invariant.c branches/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #17 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 13:15 --- Subject: Bug 43360 Author: hjl Date: Thu Mar 18 13:15:21 2010 New Revision: 157541 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157541 Log: Remove the REG_EQUAL note if we don't know its invariant status. gcc/ 2010-03-18 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com Backport from mainline: 2010-03-18 Steven Bosscher ste...@gcc.gnu.org Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com PR rtl-optimization/43360 * loop-invariant.c (move_invariant_reg): Remove the REG_EQUAL note if we don't know its invariant status. gcc/testsuite/ 2010-03-18 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com Backport from mainline: 2010-03-18 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com PR rtl-optimization/43360 * gcc.dg/torture/pr43360.c: New. Added: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr43360.c - copied unchanged from r157540, trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr43360.c Modified: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/loop-invariant.c branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #18 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-18 13:16 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to fail|4.3.4 4.4.3 4.5.0 |4.3.4 4.4.3 Known to work|4.2.1 |4.2.1 4.3.5 4.4.4 4.5.0 Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #19 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 13:20 --- For the record: bootstrapped+tested on amd64-linux and ia64-linux. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #10 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2010-03-17 06:41 --- REG_EQUAL notes are not there to guarantee correctness. Relying on them to avoid misoptimization is always wrong and just hides the bug. It is a regression from 4.2. -- bonzini at gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.2.1 Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression]|[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] |possible wrong code bug |wrong loop invariant ||hoisting http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 08:23 --- So why not just something like the following: Note that uses in REG_EQUAL notes are taken into account in the computation of invariants. Hence it is safe to retain the note even if the note contains register references. */ - if (! inv-always_executed - (note = find_reg_note (inv-insn, REG_EQUAL, NULL_RTX))) + note = find_reg_note (inv-insn, REG_EQUAL, NULL_RTX); + if (note + (! inv-always_executed + || ! check_maybe_invariant (XEXP (note, 0))) remove_note (inv-insn, note); } else In other words, nuke the note if it is not always executed or if the note value is not invariant? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 08:30 --- If it is ok to call check_maybe_invariant in this spot, then I think that's the right fix. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #13 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 08:33 --- Mine. -- steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |steven at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2010-03-14 15:32:49 |2010-03-17 08:33:51 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
[Bug rtl-optimization/43360] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] wrong loop invariant hoisting
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-17 08:59 --- I just posted the same fix. :-) Yes, it is OK for all branches. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
