public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107608] [13 Regression] Failure on fold-overflow-1.c
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:47:46 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-107608-4-kRDcsre83m@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-107608-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107608

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think we are not properly preserving IEEE exceptions in DCE and friends.  We
happily elide

void foo(float x)
{
  x + x;
}

even at -O0 - the above is elided in the gimplifier.

With -fnon-call-exceptions we are a bit more careful (but the above is gone in
the gimplifier still).

That said, as long as -ftrapping-math is default changing behavior isn't a good
idea IMHO.  We very likely have very many lurking issues that would leave
us with dead unused code around if we just fix DCE here.

As you show it's not really a regression either.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-11-10 13:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-10  9:47 [Bug tree-optimization/107608] New: " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10  9:49 ` [Bug tree-optimization/107608] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-10 13:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-11-10 18:13 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-11  7:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-13  6:30 ` [Bug tree-optimization/107608] [13 Regression] Failure on fold-overflow-1.c and pr95115.c xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-28 10:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-05 13:22 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-05 15:14 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-05 16:30 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 13:20 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 13:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-09 15:18 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10  8:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10  8:58 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 10:20 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 10:25 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 11:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 11:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 12:08 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2023-01-10 14:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 14:25 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2023-01-10 14:33 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 14:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 14:40 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10 14:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-12 11:42 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-12 12:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-12 12:26 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-13 13:19 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-13 13:25 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-15 15:43 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-16 21:38 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2023-01-16 21:46 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-16 21:55 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2023-01-16 21:58 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-18 12:26 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-18 12:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-18 12:56 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-18 13:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-18 13:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-18 13:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-19  1:15 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-19  7:17 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2023-01-26 14:29 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-27  7:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-27  7:59 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-27  9:53 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2023-01-27 10:02 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-27 10:13 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-27 11:30 ` rguenther at suse dot de

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-107608-4-kRDcsre83m@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).