On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Walter Lee <w...@tilera.com> wrote: > > On TILE-Gx, I'm observing a degradation in inlined memcpy/memset in > gcc 4.6 and later versus gcc 4.4. Though I find the problem on > TILE-Gx, I think this is a problem for any architectures with > SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS set to 1. > > Consider the following program: > > struct foo { > int x; > }; > > void copy(struct foo* f0, struct foo* f1) > { > memcpy (f0, f1, sizeof(struct foo)); > } > > In gcc 4.4, I get the desired inline memcpy: > > copy: > ld4s r1, r1 > st4 r0, r1 > jrp lr > > In gcc 4.7, however, I get inlined byte-by-byte copies: > > copy: > ld1u_add r10, r1, 1 > st1_add r0, r10, 1 > ld1u_add r10, r1, 1 > st1_add r0, r10, 1 > ld1u_add r10, r1, 1 > st1_add r0, r10, 1 > ld1u r10, r1 > st1 r0, r10 > jrp lr > > The inlining of memcpy is done in expand_builtin_memcpy in builtins.c. > Tracing through that, I see that the alignment of src_align and > dest_align, which is computed by get_pointer_alignment, has degraded: > in gcc 4.4 they are 32 bits, but in gcc 4.7 they are 8 bits. This > causes the loads generated by the inlined memcopy to be per-byte > instead of per-4-byte. > > Looking further, gcc 4.7 uses the "align" field in "struct > ptr_info_def" to compute the alignment. This field appears to be > initialized in get_ptr_info in tree-ssanames.c but it is always > initialized to 1 byte and does not appear to change. gcc 4.4 computes > its alignment information differently. > > I get the same byte-copies with gcc 4.8 and gcc 4.6. > > I see a couple related open PRs: 50417, 53535, but no suggested fixes > for them yet. Can anyone advise on how this can be fixed? Should I > file a new bug, or add this info to one of the existing PRs?
There is no way to fix it. memcpy does not require aligned arguments and the merely presence of a typed pointer contains zero information of alignment for the middle-end. If you want to excercise C's notion of alignemnt requirements then do not use memcpy but *f0 = *f1; which works equally well. ISTR Tom had various patches improving alignment info for pointers but we cannot improve this degenerate case. Btw, the new beavior even fixed bugs. Richard. > Thanks, > > Walter >