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 231563858D32; Sun,  8 May 2022 04:08:23 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 231563858D32
From: "goswin-v-b at web dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/105521] New: missed optimization in modulo arithmetic
Date: Sun, 08 May 2022 04:08:22 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: goswin-v-b at web dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status
 bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-105521-4@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: Sun, 08 May 2022 04:08:23 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105521

            Bug ID: 105521
           Summary: missed optimization in modulo arithmetic
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.3.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: goswin-v-b at web dot de
  Target Milestone: ---

I'm trying to compute (a*a)%n for uint64_t types on x86_64 using "gcc -O2 -W
-Wall" like this:

  #include <stdint.h>
  #include <assert.h>

  uint64_t sqrmod(uint64_t a, uint64_t n) {
    assert(a < n);
    unsigned __int128 x =3D a;
    x *=3D a;
    return x % n;
  }

I expected to get the following code:

  sqrmod:
        cmpq    %rsi, %rdi
        jnb     .L13         // assert(a < n) failure
        movq    %rdi, %rax
        mul     %rdi
        div     %rsi
        movq    %rdx, %rax
        ret

The compiler does get the "mul" right but instead of the "div" it throws in=
 a
call to "__umodti3". The "__umodti3" function is horribly long code that wi=
ll
be worlds slower than a simple div.

Note: The "asset(a < n);" should tell the compiler that the "div" instructi=
on
can not overflow and will not cause a #DivisionError. Without the assert the
compiler could (conditionally) add "a %=3D n;" for the same effect.

https://godbolt.org/z/cd57Wd4oo=