https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113510
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2024-01-24
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes the peephole2 in thumb1.md looks wrong:
```
;; Reloading and elimination of the frame pointer can
;; sometimes cause this optimization to be missed.
(define_peephole2
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "arm_general_register_operand" "")
(match_operand:SI 1 "const_int_operand" ""))
(set (match_dup 0)
(plus:SI (match_dup 0) (reg:SI SP_REGNUM)))]
"TARGET_THUMB1
&& UINTVAL (operands[1]) < 1024
&& (UINTVAL (operands[1]) & 3) == 0"
[(set (match_dup 0) (plus:SI (reg:SI SP_REGNUM) (match_dup 1)))]
""
)
```
Confirmed.
