public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "amacleod at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107569] [13 Regression] Failure to optimize std::isfinite since r13-3596
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2022 15:14:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-107569-4-akScYsK5TO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-107569-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107569

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> The cdce case is something I've mentioned today:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-November/605338.html
> The comparisons in there are artificial and so unlike user comparisons we
> should (if they were marked somehow) be able to optimize them away if frange
> can prove their result.
> But that isn't something happening on the #c0 testcase, is it?

in vrp2 I see:
384      range_of_stmt () at stmt if (_9 u>= 0.0)
385        range_of_expr(_9) at stmt if (_9 u>= 0.0)
           TRUE : (385) range_of_expr (_9) [frange] double [-0.0 (-0x0.0p+0),
+Inf] +-NAN
         TRUE : (384) range_of_stmt () [irange] bool VARYING

so we think that 
[frange] double [-0.0 (-0x0.0p+0), +Inf] +-NAN  u>=   0.0  does not fold.  

possibly some signalling NaN thing not allowing us to remove it?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-11-08 15:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-08 12:09 [Bug tree-optimization/107569] New: " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-08 12:09 ` [Bug tree-optimization/107569] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-08 12:59 ` pilarlatiesa at gmail dot com
2022-11-08 13:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-08 13:34 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-08 14:46 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2022-11-08 14:53 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-08 15:14 ` amacleod at redhat dot com [this message]
2022-11-08 15:34 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-08 15:53 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2022-11-08 15:55 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-08 16:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-08 17:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-09 14:20 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-09 14:27 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-09 14:30 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-09 15:01 ` pilarlatiesa at gmail dot com
2022-11-09 15:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-09 15:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-09 17:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-09 18:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10  9:32 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10  9:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 10:22 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 10:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 10:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 11:34 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 11:34 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 12:22 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 12:47 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 12:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 13:19 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 13:35 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 16:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 17:50 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 19:14 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 19:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-11  7:15 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-12  8:42 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-12  8:42 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-12  8:43 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-30  1:43 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2022-12-08 16:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-08 16:32 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-08 16:37 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-09 15:34 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2023-02-27 10:07 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-22 15:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-22 16:07 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-23  8:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-23 13:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-23 14:30 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-23 16:22 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-23 16:22 ` rguenth 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-107569-4-akScYsK5TO@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).