On Mon, 5 Feb 2024, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> On 2/5/24 01:15, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >>>
> >>> PR rtl-optimization/113255
> >>> * simplify-rtx.cc (simplify_context::simplify_binary_operation_1):
> >>> Do not re-associate a MINUS with a REG_POINTER op0.
> >> Nasty little set of problems.
On 2/5/24 01:15, Richard Biener wrote:
PR rtl-optimization/113255
* simplify-rtx.cc (simplify_context::simplify_binary_operation_1):
Do not re-associate a MINUS with a REG_POINTER op0.
Nasty little set of problems. I don't think we ever pondered that we could
have multiple
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> On 2/1/24 07:20, Richard Biener wrote:
> > The following avoids re-associating
> >
> > (minus:DI (reg/f:DI 119)
> > (minus:DI (reg/f:DI 120)
> > (reg/f:DI 114)))
> >
> > into
> >
> > (minus:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 114)
> >
On 2/1/24 07:20, Richard Biener wrote:
The following avoids re-associating
(minus:DI (reg/f:DI 119)
(minus:DI (reg/f:DI 120)
(reg/f:DI 114)))
into
(minus:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 114)
(reg/f:DI 119))
(reg/f:DI 120))
as that possibly confuses the REG_POINTER
The following avoids re-associating
(minus:DI (reg/f:DI 119)
(minus:DI (reg/f:DI 120)
(reg/f:DI 114)))
into
(minus:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 114)
(reg/f:DI 119))
(reg/f:DI 120))
as that possibly confuses the REG_POINTER heuristics of RTL
alias analysis. This happens to
