public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/104526] [12 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 (trunk vs. 11.2.0) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 12:39:39 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-104526-4-0hNCDtSlip@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-104526-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104526 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- + tree type = TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (cond, 0)); + if (type != TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (cond, 1))) + return false; looks unnecessarily restrictive. What tree-cfg.cc verification guarantees (and no need to check it in the ranger) is what verify_gimple_comparison verifies, i.e. that /* For comparisons we do not have the operations type as the effective type the comparison is carried out in. Instead we require that either the first operand is trivially convertible into the second, or the other way around. */ if (!useless_type_conversion_p (op0_type, op1_type) && !useless_type_conversion_p (op1_type, op0_type)) I think the ranger has to be prepared for non-pointer-equal type mismatches as long as they are useless_type_conversion_p compatible, that can happen anywhere in the IL, including even cases like different but useless_type_conversion_p compatible types of binary operators like +, -, * etc. So I'd just remove the if (type != TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (cond, 1))) return false; lines.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-16 12:39 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-02-14 10:07 [Bug tree-optimization/104526] New: " theodort at inf dot ethz.ch 2022-02-14 10:12 ` [Bug tree-optimization/104526] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-14 13:41 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-14 14:33 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-14 22:14 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2022-02-15 22:12 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-15 22:13 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2022-02-16 12:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-02-16 14:05 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2022-02-16 14:07 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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-104526-4-0hNCDtSlip@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: linkBe 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).