From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 34BB53858D35; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 14:18:27 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 34BB53858D35 From: "rguenther at suse dot de" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/103037] [11/12 Regression] Wrong code with -O2 since r11-6100-gd41b097350d3c5d0 Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 14:18:26 +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: rguenther at suse dot de X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.3 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 14:18:27 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D103037 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 2 Nov 2021, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D103037 >=20 > --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- > We have: > var_3.2_4 =3D var_3; > iftmp.1_14 =3D (int) var_3.2_4; > var_11_lsm.14_8 =3D _7(D); >=20 > [local count: 955630225]: > # RANGE [0, 24] NONZERO 31 > # a_20 =3D PHI > _19 =3D MEM [(short unsigned int &)&arr_4][a_2= 0]; > if (_19 > 1) > goto ; [50.00%] > else > goto ; [50.00%] >=20 > [local count: 477815112]: > # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 > _3 =3D (int) _19; > if (_19 !=3D 0) > goto ; [20.00%] > else > goto ; [80.00%] >=20 > [local count: 477815112]: > # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 > # _24 =3D PHI <_3(4), 1(3)> > # RANGE [1, 65535] NONZERO 65535 > iftmp.1_15 =3D (int) _19; > goto ; [100.00%] >=20 > [local count: 477815112]: >=20 > [local count: 955630225]: > # RANGE [-32768, 65535] > # iftmp.1_10 =3D PHI > # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 > # _25 =3D PHI <_24(5), 0(6)> > # RANGE [-1, 1] > _5 =3D _25 / iftmp.1_10; > and seems PRE is trying top simplify 1 / _3 and _3 / _3. _3 has correctly > range of [0, 1] - in that bb _19 can't be anything but 0 or 1 given the > condition, but > iftmp.1_15 =3D (int) _19; isn't equivalent to that, because it is reachab= le from > other bbs, even when it is also (int) _19. > So, does PRE need to temporarily reset_flow_sensitive_info in such cases = and > restore if it didn't succeed? No, we have means to avoid this situation but somehow it doesn't work. Give me some time to look into this.=