* [Bug tree-optimization/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
@ 2021-05-19 10:32 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
2021-05-19 11:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: zsojka at seznam dot cz @ 2021-05-19 10:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
Zdenek Sojka <zsojka at seznam dot cz> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail| |10.3.1, 11.1.1, 12.0,
| |5.5.0, 6.5.0, 7.5.0, 8.4.0,
| |9.3.1
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka <zsojka at seznam dot cz> ---
Adding 8.4.0 as "Known to fail", since 8.5.0 cannot be entered:
The value "8.5.0" used in the "Known to fail" field is not a valid version for
the "gcc" product.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
2021-05-19 10:32 ` [Bug tree-optimization/100672] " zsojka at seznam dot cz
@ 2021-05-19 11:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-19 11:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-19 11:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Maybe sth is wrong with the testcase? clang also results in an abort. Isn't
right-shift of negative values undefined?
.original dumps
;; Function foo (null)
;; enabled by -tree-original
{
return VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<V>(VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<vector(4) signed long>(v) >>
1);
}
where the negate is dopped somehow.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
2021-05-19 10:32 ` [Bug tree-optimization/100672] " zsojka at seznam dot cz
2021-05-19 11:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-19 11:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-19 11:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-19 11:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2021-05-19
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We have in negate_expr/negate_expr_p
case RSHIFT_EXPR:
/* Optimize -((int)x >> 31) into (unsigned)x >> 31 for int. */
if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)) == INTEGER_CST)
{
tree op1 = TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
if (wi::to_wide (op1) == TYPE_PRECISION (type) - 1)
{
tree ntype = TYPE_UNSIGNED (type)
? signed_type_for (type)
: unsigned_type_for (type);
tree temp = fold_convert_loc (loc, ntype, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
temp = fold_build2_loc (loc, RSHIFT_EXPR, ntype, temp, op1);
return fold_convert_loc (loc, type, temp);
}
}
note the use of TYPE_PRECISION on a vector type...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 11:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-19 11:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-19 11:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-19 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
diff --git a/gcc/fold-const.c b/gcc/fold-const.c
index 419117dca3f..ef0d15a289d 100644
--- a/gcc/fold-const.c
+++ b/gcc/fold-const.c
@@ -512,7 +512,7 @@ negate_expr_p (tree t)
if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)) == INTEGER_CST)
{
tree op1 = TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
- if (wi::to_wide (op1) == TYPE_PRECISION (type) - 1)
+ if (wi::to_wide (op1) == element_precision (type) - 1)
return true;
}
break;
@@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ fold_negate_expr_1 (location_t loc, tree t)
if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)) == INTEGER_CST)
{
tree op1 = TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
- if (wi::to_wide (op1) == TYPE_PRECISION (type) - 1)
+ if (wi::to_wide (op1) == element_precision (type) - 1)
{
tree ntype = TYPE_UNSIGNED (type)
? signed_type_for (type)
fixes that, retaining the negate, but it's still broken somewhere.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 11:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-19 11:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-19 11:33 ` [Bug middle-end/100672] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-19 11:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmm, don't you want a signed vector component? You're getting a logical right
shift as written.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 11:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-19 11:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-19 11:44 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (9 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-19 11:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
typedef long long __attribute__((__vector_size__ (32))) V;
V
foo (V v)
{
return -(v >> 1);
}
int
main (void)
{
V v = foo ((V) { -2, -4, -6, -8 });
if (v[0] != 1 || v[1] != 2 || v[2] != 3 || v[3] != 4)
__builtin_abort ();
return 0;
}
fails before my patch and succeeds afterwards.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 11:33 ` [Bug middle-end/100672] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-19 11:44 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
2021-05-19 11:54 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: zsojka at seznam dot cz @ 2021-05-19 11:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #7 from Zdenek Sojka <zsojka at seznam dot cz> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Maybe sth is wrong with the testcase? clang also results in an abort. Isn't
> right-shift of negative values undefined?
>
Thank you for having a look.
I believe the behavior is fully defined. The vectors are unsigned, and the
conversion to unsigned is done by adding 2**64; this behaves the same:
$ cat testcase.c
typedef unsigned long long __attribute__((__vector_size__ (32))) V;
V
foo (V v)
{
return -(v >> 1);
}
int
main (void)
{
V v = foo ((V) { 0xfffffffffffffffe, 0xfffffffffffffffc,
0xfffffffffffffffa, 0xfffffffffffffff8 });
if (v[0] != 1 || v[1] != 2 || v[2] != 3 || v[3] != 4)
__builtin_abort ();
return 0;
}
Maybe clang behaves the same since the behavior was the same in the moment when
clang was forked.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 11:44 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
@ 2021-05-19 11:54 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-19 11:56 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (7 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-19 11:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Zdenek Sojka from comment #7)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > Maybe sth is wrong with the testcase? clang also results in an abort. Isn't
> > right-shift of negative values undefined?
> >
>
> Thank you for having a look.
>
> I believe the behavior is fully defined. The vectors are unsigned, and the
> conversion to unsigned is done by adding 2**64; this behaves the same:
>
> $ cat testcase.c
> typedef unsigned long long __attribute__((__vector_size__ (32))) V;
>
> V
> foo (V v)
> {
> return -(v >> 1);
but this is a logical right shift, thus gives 0x7ff...e, ...
and negating that doesn't yield 1.
> }
>
> int
> main (void)
> {
> V v = foo ((V) { 0xfffffffffffffffe, 0xfffffffffffffffc,
> 0xfffffffffffffffa, 0xfffffffffffffff8 });
> if (v[0] != 1 || v[1] != 2 || v[2] != 3 || v[3] != 4)
> __builtin_abort ();
> return 0;
> }
>
> Maybe clang behaves the same since the behavior was the same in the moment
> when clang was forked.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 11:54 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-19 11:56 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
2021-05-19 12:00 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (6 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: zsojka at seznam dot cz @ 2021-05-19 11:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #9 from Zdenek Sojka <zsojka at seznam dot cz> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> (In reply to Zdenek Sojka from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > > Maybe sth is wrong with the testcase? clang also results in an abort. Isn't
> > > right-shift of negative values undefined?
> > >
> >
> > Thank you for having a look.
> >
> > I believe the behavior is fully defined. The vectors are unsigned, and the
> > conversion to unsigned is done by adding 2**64; this behaves the same:
> >
> > $ cat testcase.c
> > typedef unsigned long long __attribute__((__vector_size__ (32))) V;
> >
> > V
> > foo (V v)
> > {
> > return -(v >> 1);
>
> but this is a logical right shift, thus gives 0x7ff...e, ...
> and negating that doesn't yield 1.
>
Shame on me. You are very right.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 11:56 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
@ 2021-05-19 12:00 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
2021-05-19 13:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: zsojka at seznam dot cz @ 2021-05-19 12:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #10 from Zdenek Sojka <zsojka at seznam dot cz> ---
(In reply to Zdenek Sojka from comment #9)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> > (In reply to Zdenek Sojka from comment #7)
> > > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > > > Maybe sth is wrong with the testcase? clang also results in an abort. Isn't
> > > > right-shift of negative values undefined?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thank you for having a look.
> > >
> > > I believe the behavior is fully defined. The vectors are unsigned, and the
> > > conversion to unsigned is done by adding 2**64; this behaves the same:
> > >
> > > $ cat testcase.c
> > > typedef unsigned long long __attribute__((__vector_size__ (32))) V;
> > >
> > > V
> > > foo (V v)
> > > {
> > > return -(v >> 1);
> >
> > but this is a logical right shift, thus gives 0x7ff...e, ...
> > and negating that doesn't yield 1.
> >
>
> Shame on me. You are very right.
I did the mistake while reducing the testcase.
The original testcase had positive arguments:
$ cat testcase.c
typedef unsigned long long __attribute__((__vector_size__ (32))) V;
V
foo (V v)
{
return -(v >> 1);
}
int
main (void)
{
V v = foo ((V) { 2, 4, 6, 8 });
if (v[0] != 0xffffffffffffffff || v[1] != 0xfffffffffffffffe ||
v[2] != 0xfffffffffffffffd || v[3] != 0xfffffffffffffffc)
__builtin_abort ();
return 0;
}
I wanted to prevent the long 0xfffff... constants, but broke the testcase in he
process. Thank you for correcting me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 12:00 ` zsojka at seznam dot cz
@ 2021-05-19 13:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-19 13:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-19 13:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener <rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8d51039cb7c807ed84ff7df5416a1e3ba07a5e63
commit r12-913-g8d51039cb7c807ed84ff7df5416a1e3ba07a5e63
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Wed May 19 13:35:07 2021 +0200
middle-end/100672 - fix bogus right shift folding
This fixes the bogus use of TYPE_PRECISION on vector types
from optimizing -((int)x >> 31) into (unsigned)x >> 31.
2021-05-19 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR middle-end/100672
* fold-const.c (fold_negate_expr_1): Use element_precision.
(negate_expr_p): Likewise.
* gcc.dg/torture/pr100672.c: New testcase.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 13:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-19 13:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-25 9:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-19 13:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail|12.0 |
Known to work| |12.0
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed on trunk sofar.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-19 13:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-25 9:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 13:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-25 9:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
<rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e0dae9c92aa248c858f682f03ee1b16471297718
commit r11-8652-ge0dae9c92aa248c858f682f03ee1b16471297718
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Wed May 19 13:35:07 2021 +0200
middle-end/100672 - fix bogus right shift folding
This fixes the bogus use of TYPE_PRECISION on vector types
from optimizing -((int)x >> 31) into (unsigned)x >> 31.
2021-05-19 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR middle-end/100672
* fold-const.c (fold_negate_expr_1): Use element_precision.
(negate_expr_p): Likewise.
* gcc.dg/torture/pr100672.c: New testcase.
(cherry picked from commit 8d51039cb7c807ed84ff7df5416a1e3ba07a5e63)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-25 9:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-09 13:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 13:45 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 13:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-09 13:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
<rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e8311f59c6e2fa1f5aacc3da5e95739886ebdee7
commit r10-10261-ge8311f59c6e2fa1f5aacc3da5e95739886ebdee7
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Wed May 19 13:35:07 2021 +0200
middle-end/100672 - fix bogus right shift folding
This fixes the bogus use of TYPE_PRECISION on vector types
from optimizing -((int)x >> 31) into (unsigned)x >> 31.
2021-05-19 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR middle-end/100672
* fold-const.c (fold_negate_expr_1): Use element_precision.
(negate_expr_p): Likewise.
* gcc.dg/torture/pr100672.c: New testcase.
(cherry picked from commit 8d51039cb7c807ed84ff7df5416a1e3ba07a5e63)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-09 13:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-09 13:45 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 13:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-09 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
<rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cc589cc7923b048b2722980cac69463b6f2e1941
commit r9-9820-gcc589cc7923b048b2722980cac69463b6f2e1941
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Wed May 19 13:35:07 2021 +0200
middle-end/100672 - fix bogus right shift folding
This fixes the bogus use of TYPE_PRECISION on vector types
from optimizing -((int)x >> 31) into (unsigned)x >> 31.
2021-05-19 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR middle-end/100672
* fold-const.c (fold_negate_expr_1): Use element_precision.
(negate_expr_p): Likewise.
* gcc.dg/torture/pr100672.c: New testcase.
(cherry picked from commit 8d51039cb7c807ed84ff7df5416a1e3ba07a5e63)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/100672] wrong code with vector shift and unary minus
2021-05-19 10:30 [Bug tree-optimization/100672] New: wrong code with vector shift and unary minus zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-09 13:45 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-09 13:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-09 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100672
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to fail|9.3.1 |9.3.0
Known to work| |9.3.1
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread