A patch in the attachment fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79949
The patch was successfully tested and bootstrapped on x86-64.
Committed as rev. 246003.
Index: ChangeLog
===================================================================
--- ChangeLog (revision 246002)
+++ ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2017-03-09 Vladimir Makarov <vmaka...@redhat.com>
+
+ PR rtl-optimization/79949
+ * lra-constraints.c (process_alt_operands): Check memory when
+ trying to predict a cycle. Print about the overall increase.
+
2017-03-09 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
PR middle-end/79971
Index: lra-constraints.c
===================================================================
--- lra-constraints.c (revision 246002)
+++ lra-constraints.c (working copy)
@@ -2766,13 +2766,15 @@ process_alt_operands (int only_alternati
&& REG_P (no_subreg_reg_operand[1])
/* Check that we reload memory not the memory
address. */
- && !curr_alt_offmemok[0]
+ && ! (curr_alt_offmemok[0]
+ && MEM_P (no_subreg_reg_operand[0]))
&& reg_in_class_p (no_subreg_reg_operand[1], curr_alt[0]))
|| (curr_alt_win[0] && ! curr_alt_win[1]
&& REG_P (no_subreg_reg_operand[0])
/* Check that we reload memory not the memory
address. */
- && !curr_alt_offmemok[1]
+ && ! (curr_alt_offmemok[1]
+ && MEM_P (no_subreg_reg_operand[1]))
&& reg_in_class_p (no_subreg_reg_operand[0], curr_alt[1])
&& (! CONST_POOL_OK_P (curr_operand_mode[1],
no_subreg_reg_operand[1])
@@ -2785,8 +2787,11 @@ process_alt_operands (int only_alternati
&& GET_CODE (no_subreg_reg_operand[1]) != PLUS)))
{
/* We have a move insn and a new reload insn will be similar
- to the current insn. We should avoid such situation as it
- results in LRA cycling. */
+ to the current insn. We should avoid such situation as
+ it results in LRA cycling. */
+ if (lra_dump_file != NULL)
+ fprintf (lra_dump_file,
+ " Cycle danger: overall += LRA_MAX_REJECT\n");
overall += LRA_MAX_REJECT;
}
ok_p = true;
