https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50883
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Fri, 4 Feb 2022, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50883 > > Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org > > --- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > > Btw, I thought about this issue quite extensively together with Michael Matz > > and it's going to be a mess, in particular on the call side. Representing > > things on GIMPLE will also be fun. > > Is it really worth the hassle though for real-world code, i.e. as opposed to > toy examples, now that we have IPA-SRA and the like? I've looked at this in the context of BB vectorization which can cause awful code when parameters / return vars are participating and GIMPLE represents things as memory but RTL not. But no, I don't remember any case from SPEC where it makes a difference in the end. Judging from the amount of duplicates we get around parameter / return issues people do run into this.
