From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id CB5C23858038; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 08:38:05 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org CB5C23858038
From: "aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/102736] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1
 -ftree-vrp by r12-3903
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 08:38:05 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc assigned_to
Message-ID: <bug-102736-4-KaVqDlMAWu@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-102736-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-102736-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 08:38:05 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D102736

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |aldyh at gcc dot gn=
u.org

--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #2)
> works with  --disable-tree-vrp-thread1
>=20
>=20
> Looking at the  .vrp-thread1 listing, I see a lot of
>=20
>  Registering value_relation (_4 >=3D a.4_14) on (3->4)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_5 =3D=3D iftmp.6_13) (bb4)
>   [1] Registering jump thread: (4, 5) incoming edge;  (5, 7) joiner (7, 8)
> normal (8, 9) nocopy;
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (iftmp.6_12 =3D=3D iftmp.6_13) =
(bb6)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (iftmp.6_12 =3D=3D iftmp.6_13) =
(bb6)
>   [2] Registering jump thread: (6, 7) incoming edge;  (7, 9) joiner;
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (iftmp.6_12 =3D=3D iftmp.6_13) =
(bb6)
>   [3] Registering jump thread: (6, 7) incoming edge;  (7, 8) joiner (8, 9)
> nocopy;
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_5 =3D=3D iftmp.6_13) (bb5)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_5 =3D=3D iftmp.6_13) (bb5)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_5 =3D=3D iftmp.6_13) (bb5)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_4 < a.4_14) (bb3)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_3 =3D=3D iftmp.3_15) (bb3)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_4 < a.4_14) (bb3)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_3 =3D=3D iftmp.3_15) (bb3)
>  Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_5 =3D=3D iftmp.6_13) (bb3)

What you're seeing here is the verbosity out of path_oracle::register_relat=
ion
for each candidate path as it's being tried.

What I've been doing is avoiding dumping the details of the path solver in
action, unless TDF_THREADING, but the above message is coming from the path
oracle itself, which is keyed off of TDF_DETAILS.

This is a bit confusing.  Perhaps we should silence these messages unless
TDF_THREADING?  What do you think?=