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/108647] [13 Regression] ICE in upper_bound, at value-range.h:950 with -O3 since r13-2974-g67166c9ec35d58ef Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2023 15:23:14 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-108647-4-sqvHZOSX8y@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-108647-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108647 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #9) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8) > > Unfortunately that would mean for the non-equality cases that if > > lhs.undefined_p () we don't return undefined but false (aka VARYING). > > Another option is to add those if (op?.undefined_p ()) return false; to both > > case BRS_TRUE: and case BRS_FALSE:. > > Well, if the LHS is undefined, (or even one of the operands) we are > typically in dead code or edge anyway.. I'm not sure it really matters? Ok, I'll test the patch then. > An alternate question as well is why is the threader even looking at this > impossible path. It should know that the branch can never be true I think range-op shouldn't assume nothing will call it with UNDEFINED ranges.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-03 15:23 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-02-02 21:21 [Bug tree-optimization/108647] New: [13 Regression] ICE in upper_bound, at value-range.h:950 with -O3 vsevolod.livinskiy at gmail dot com 2023-02-03 1:45 ` [Bug tree-optimization/108647] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 8:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 9:21 ` [Bug tree-optimization/108647] [13 Regression] ICE in upper_bound, at value-range.h:950 with -O3 since r13-2974-g67166c9ec35d58ef marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 9:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 9:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 12:46 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 14:54 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-02-03 15:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 15:15 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 15:20 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-02-03 15:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-02-03 15:28 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-02-03 16:16 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 16:31 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 16:33 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 16:35 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 20:31 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 20:39 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 20:43 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-04 1:35 ` raj.khem at gmail dot com 2023-02-04 4:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-04 5:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-04 7:26 ` raj.khem at gmail dot com
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-108647-4-sqvHZOSX8y@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).