This patch addresses a deficiency found when testing a patch to fix
undesirable gimple code created by reassociation (pr64910). Based on
what I've seen from a code generation standpoint before/after this
patch, I would say it's highly likely this is fixing a regression in gcc-5.
[ This is a piece of 64910 -- essentially it avoids regressing code
generation when the fix for 64910 is applied. ]
combine.c::make_extraction will query the backend for the correct modes
to use for field extractions. Essentially it looks at the backend's
extraction pattern. In 4.9 for x86 we had:
(define_expand "extzv"
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand")
(zero_extract:SI (match_operand 1 "ext_register_operand")
(match_operand:SI 2 "const8_operand")
(match_operand:SI 3 "const8_operand")))]
make_extraction looks at the modes of the various parts of the
zero_extract rtx and uses it to create a suitable zero_extract
expression & operands. If the rtx/operand has no mode, word_mode will
be used. Note carefully the mode of the zero-extract -- SImode in this
case.
Anyway, the result of make_extraction is embedded into other patterns
like this:
(set (flags) (compare (zero_extract:MODE ...) (const_int 0))
Which will be then passed to recog to try and match a backend pattern.
Again in 4.9 we have:
(define_insn "*testqi_ext_3"
[(set (reg FLAGS_REG)
(compare (zero_extract:SWI48
(match_operand 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "rm")
(match_operand:SWI48 1 "const_int_operand")
(match_operand:SWI48 2 "const_int_operand"))
(const_int 0)))]
So note how the testqi_ext_3 pattern's modes (SWI48, ie, SI/DI) are a
strict superset of those in the extzv expander for the zero_extract rtx
(SI).
That's all fine and good. However, if we look at the trunk (or gcc-5) we
have:
(define_expand "extzv<mode>"
[(set (match_operand:SWI248 0 "register_operand")
(zero_extract:SWI248 (match_operand:SWI248 1 "register_operand")
(match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand")
(match_operand:SI 3 "const_int_operand")))]
And
(define_insn "*testqi_ext_3"
[(set (reg FLAGS_REG)
(compare (zero_extract:SWI48
(match_operand 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "rm")
(match_operand 1 "const_int_operand" "n")
(match_operand 2 "const_int_operand" "n"))
(const_int 0)))]
Note how the mode of the zero_extract in the expander allows HImode
(SWI248), but the mode of the zero_extract in testqi_ext_3 does not
allow HImode (SWI48).
So make_extraction will create
(set (flags) (compare (zero_extract:HI (...) (const_int 0))
But testqi_ext_3 does not support HImode on the zero_extract and the
pattern doesn't match which cripples combine's ability to create these
insns.
Fixing this results in consistently better code by eliminating setup
code for bit tests. It's quite pervasive in GCC itself.
This has been bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-linux-gnu,
with and without the rest of the fix for 64910. The test has been
tested on x86 and x86-64.
OK for the trunk?
diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index 1caa076..e6ec3cd 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2015-12-19 Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>
+
+ PR tree-optimization/64910
+ * config/i386/i386.md (testqi_ext_3): Allow HImode.
+
2015-12-18 Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>
PR rtl-optimization/49847
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
index 49b2216..e8178f3 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
@@ -7868,7 +7868,7 @@
;; Combine likes to form bit extractions for some tests. Humor it.
(define_insn "*testqi_ext_3"
[(set (reg FLAGS_REG)
- (compare (zero_extract:SWI48
+ (compare (zero_extract:SWI248
(match_operand 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "rm")
(match_operand 1 "const_int_operand" "n")
(match_operand 2 "const_int_operand" "n"))
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog b/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
index 57326d1..143c73c 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2015-12-19 Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>
+
+ PR tree-optimization/64910
+ * gcc.target/i386/bittest.c: New test.
+
2015-12-18 Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>
PR rtl-optimization/49847
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/bittest.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/bittest.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7b7ce9e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/bittest.c
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2" } */
+
+extern int dbg_cnt (void);
+
+struct function
+{
+ unsigned int calls_setjmp:1;
+};
+extern struct function *cfun;
+unsigned char
+gate_rtl_cprop (void)
+{
+ return !(cfun + 0)->calls_setjmp && dbg_cnt ();
+}
+
+/* This should be implementable without performing a bitmask as we can
+ just use a test imm,mem. So instructions which load the object from
+ memory and mask off bits are unnecessary. In theory we can just count
+ the move-with-extension, and and testb instructions. There should be
+ only one. */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "movzbl|and|testb" 1 { target { i?86-*-*
x86_64-*-*} } } } */
