[Bug tree-optimization/39233] [4.4 Regression] ivopts + vrp miscompilation

["rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

------- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-02-18 18:47 -------
This patch fixes it, with unknown side-effects.  It should be ok for
the common sizetype extensions due to POINTER_PLUS_EXPR (sizetype is
unsigned for sane languages).

Index: tree-scalar-evolution.c
===================================================================
--- tree-scalar-evolution.c     (revision 144265)
+++ tree-scalar-evolution.c     (working copy)
@@ -2799,6 +2799,14 @@ simple_iv (struct loop *loop, gimple stm
       || chrec_contains_symbols_defined_in_loop (iv->base, loop->num))
     return false;

+  /* If we folded casts and the result is a type where overflow is
+     undefined the IV may not be simple as it can have introduced
+     undefined overflow that wasn't there before.  */
+  if (folded_casts
+      && (TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED (type)
+         || POINTER_TYPE_P (type)))
+    return false;
+
   iv->no_overflow = !folded_casts && TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED (type);

   return true;


The following patch would be slightly less intrusive (only affects IVOPTs),
but possibly other passes might be affected by the same bug.  OTOH it
doesn't affect number-of-iterations analysis, which the above does.

Index: tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
===================================================================
--- tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c      (revision 144265)
+++ tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c      (working copy)
@@ -887,6 +887,14 @@ determine_biv_step (gimple phi)
   if (!simple_iv (loop, phi, name, &iv, true))
     return NULL_TREE;

+  /* If the IV may overflow and the result is a type we know does not
+     overflow we may have introduced undefined overflow.  Do not use
+     that induction variable.  */
+  if (!iv.no_overflow
+      && (TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED (TREE_TYPE (name))
+         || POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (name))))
+    return NULL_TREE;
+
   return integer_zerop (iv.step) ? NULL_TREE : iv.step;
 }

@@ -992,6 +1000,15 @@ find_givs_in_stmt_scev (struct ivopts_da

   if (!simple_iv (loop, stmt, lhs, iv, true))
     return false;
+
+  /* If the IV may overflow and the result is a type we know does not
+     overflow we may have introduced undefined overflow.  Do not use
+     that induction variable.  */
+  if (!iv->no_overflow
+      && (TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED (TREE_TYPE (lhs))
+         || POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (lhs))))
+    return false;
+
   iv->base = expand_simple_operations (iv->base);

   if (contains_abnormal_ssa_name_p (iv->base)


in the end someone finally should sit down and make overflowing/non-overflowing
arithmetic explicit in the IL.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39233