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 F1BEF383EB26; Thu,  8 Dec 2022 22:44:51 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F1BEF383EB26
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1670539491;
	bh=tLXEi7g++CPxxNQzePSZGo5AoxWddaxfIHwMztHY9ug=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=qoY1DKTsZVNto9Tgzw1DSCTSCJnPquwjpObz+8JbN2Gm17FOjT2h54EYQnJCuuxok
	 6ySfQNukpCFrGOnuGri1/ZK2xoDSHCsT1oXO+0UCdHueQUAUkFxuXyJu8sWn6Eu4Kg
	 ce0/7dqYmhWLb81PZ2hGs2dYAf95dQn7doMbsOkg=
From: "slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107879] [13 Regression] ffmpeg-4 test suite
 fails on FPU arithmetics
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 22:44:50 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107879-4-kpVSs1miDE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107879-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107879-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107879

--- Comment #12 from Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> It is the foperator_mult::op{1,2}_range and can be seen even on:
> double
> foo (double x, double y)
> {
>   double z =3D x * y;
>   if (z =3D=3D 0.0)
>     return x;
>   return 42.0;
> }
> testcase.
> 2->3  (T) x_2(D) :      [frange] double [-0.0 (-0x0.0p+0), 0.0 (0x0.0p+0)]
> 2->3  (T) y_3(D) :      [frange] double [-0.0 (-0x0.0p+0), 0.0 (0x0.0p+0)]
> 2->3  (T) z_4 :         [frange] double [-0.0 (-0x0.0p+0), 0.0 (0x0.0p+0)]
> On the true edge of z =3D=3D 0.0, we have [-0., 0.] range for z_4, that is

For my curiosity fow did you get such a detailed [frange] output for the
expressions? I tried -fdump-tree-all-all and best I get is a one-liner arou=
nd
PHI nodes:

  # RANGE [frange] double [0.0 (0x0.0p+0), +Inf]
  # iftmp.5_6 =3D PHI <omww_17(3), 0.0(4), 0.0(6)>
  # .MEM_23 =3D PHI <.MEM_19(3), .MEM_19(4), .MEM_15(6)>
  # VUSE <.MEM_23>
  return iftmp.5_6;

Is there a magic gcc flag to dump more range details? Or you had to patch a=
 bit
of gcc code?=