public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "hjl.tools at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/103194] [12 Regression] ice in optimize_atomic_bit_test_and with __sync_fetch_and_and since r12-5102-gfb161782545224f5
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 01:49:38 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-103194-4-l3ICkoWn3F@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-103194-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103194

--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #8)
> unsigned long pscc_a_2_3;
> int pscc_a_1_4;
> unsigned long pc2;
> void pscc(int n)
> {
>   long mask = 1ll << n;
>   pc2 = __sync_fetch_and_or(&pscc_a_2_3, mask) & mask;
> }
> 
> void pscc1(int n)
> {
>   long mask = 1ll << 65;
>   pc2 = __sync_fetch_and_or(&pscc_a_2_3, mask) & mask;
> }
> 
> pscc and pscc1 have different behavior when n >= 64, It seems unsafe to
> optimize variable mask?

Is the behavior well defined for n >= 64? I got

foo.c:11:19: warning: left shift count >= width of type
[-Wshift-count-overflow]
   11 |   long mask = 1ll << 65;
      |                   ^~

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-11-16  1:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-11 16:48 [Bug c/103194] New: ice in optimize_atomic_bit_test_and, at tree-ssa-ccp.c:3626 dcb314 at hotmail dot com
2021-11-11 16:50 ` [Bug c/103194] " dcb314 at hotmail dot com
2021-11-11 17:20 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103194] [12 Regression] ice in optimize_atomic_bit_test_and with __sync_fetch_and_and pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-11 18:56 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-11-12  7:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-12  9:29 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103194] [12 Regression] ice in optimize_atomic_bit_test_and with __sync_fetch_and_and since r12-5102-gfb161782545224f5 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-12 13:43 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-11-13 15:04 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-11-13 15:11 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-11-15  1:23 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-11-15  2:47 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-11-15  8:32 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-11-15  9:06 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-11-15  9:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-16  1:30 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-11-16  1:49 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com [this message]
2021-11-16  1:51 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-11-16  2:24 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-11-16  2:39 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-11-16  3:26 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-11-16  6:19 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-11-16  6:45 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-11-24  1:01 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-24  1:02 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-12-15 12:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-16  1:27 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2021-12-19 23:47 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-103194-4-l3ICkoWn3F@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).