From patchwork Tue Nov 6 22:18:13 2012 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jakub Jelinek X-Patchwork-Id: 197562 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F7F02C00E7 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 09:18:29 +1100 (EST) Comment: DKIM? See http://www.dkim.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; x=1352845110; h=Comment: DomainKey-Signature:Received:Received:Received:Received:Received: Received:Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition: In-Reply-To:User-Agent:Mailing-List:Precedence:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:Sender: Delivered-To; bh=RND2zc7RGCCsytPthxI1jfmF0+U=; b=eD1gjGnCBJTQUG7 lWcJVckFC7tGSfvebnm2kDK0K4sGfSADRAZkEW4DBFlU05MALEk4IelsVeaxou5I MI/PMPaqZsS2o6zSLQ7IUoBG4hv8mHuH6L9LrFtf21h3T43dm/oMxWe1To8Flh0x k8xSY4RE0fJuxskbvW0uLowoNsjM= Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=Received:Received:X-SWARE-Spam-Status:X-Spam-Check-By:Received:Received:Received:Received:Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:User-Agent:X-IsSubscribed:Mailing-List:Precedence:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:Sender:Delivered-To; b=WGlanNxtCChI2AP+VwDkVSXWb6oUnMgcuCT+0GEFrYo05jys/uaFRMZ+QmcziB 3sVUX5FoAH31ff40loIwz6J90L9MmLFCdQVQww5eO9elfFsitGyAGkjs2naR5Z8f Lksb3G/LVLYhxegaHtJvkQEOyIuJdMkJVAce6IdOAWU+4=; Received: (qmail 21940 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2012 22:18:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 21931 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Nov 2012 22:18:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST, KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W, RP_MATCHES_RCVD, SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Nov 2012 22:18:17 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qA6MIGe4007218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 6 Nov 2012 17:18:16 -0500 Received: from zalov.redhat.com (vpn1-7-86.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.7.86]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA6MIFtW002642 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 6 Nov 2012 17:18:16 -0500 Received: from zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zalov.redhat.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qA6MIEll030373; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 23:18:14 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by zalov.cz (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id qA6MIETO030372; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 23:18:14 +0100 Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 23:18:13 +0100 From: Jakub Jelinek To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: Kirill Yukhin , Uros Bizjak , Vladimir Yakovlev , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Vzeroupper placement/47440 Message-ID: <20121106221813.GZ1881@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 02:11:50PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > Hello, > >> OK for mainline SVN, please commit. > > Checked into GCC trunk: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-11/msg00176.html > > > > Thanks, K > > This caused: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55224 Not only that, it also broke --enable-checking=yes,rtl bootstrap. SET_DEST isn't valid on CALL, but XEXP (call, 0) is a MEM anyway and the code looks for reg, so I think looking for CALL was just a mistake. This fixes the bootstrap, ok for trunk? 2012-11-06 Jakub Jelinek * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_avx_u128_mode_after): Don't look for reg in CALL operand. Jakub --- gcc/config/i386/i386.c.jj 2012-11-06 18:10:22.000000000 +0100 +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.c 2012-11-06 20:15:09.068912242 +0100 @@ -15084,9 +15084,9 @@ ix86_avx_u128_mode_after (int mode, rtx /* Check for CALL instruction. */ if (CALL_P (insn)) { - if (GET_CODE (pat) == SET || GET_CODE (pat) == CALL) + if (GET_CODE (pat) == SET) reg = SET_DEST (pat); - else if (GET_CODE (pat) == PARALLEL) + else if (GET_CODE (pat) == PARALLEL) for (i = XVECLEN (pat, 0) - 1; i >= 0; i--) { rtx x = XVECEXP (pat, 0, i);