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/109008] [13 Regression] Wrong code in scipy package since r13-3926-gd4c2f1d376da6f
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2023 13:34:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-109008-4-g8mZlaiuH1@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-109008-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109008

--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So, can't we say compute what we compute right now for the reverse operation
and then call some helper function which will try to extended that range a
little bit in both directions by performing frange_arithmetic (or variant
thereof) on the original operation and checking if the other op's range OP the
slightly extended range still yields the result range?  Of course it would be
better if we knew how to exactly compute that rather than try to iteratively
guess, but even iterative guess could say punt after a few iterations on
smallest range extension which would already result in a different range. 
Though, I bet reverse multiplication/division are even harder because there we
perform the reverse operation of all the boundaries against each other and
union.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-03-03 13:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-03 12:08 [Bug tree-optimization/109008] New: [13 Regression ]Maybe wrong " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 12:11 ` [Bug tree-optimization/109008] [13 Regression] Maybe " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 12:14 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 12:18 ` [Bug tree-optimization/109008] [13 Regression] Wrong " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 12:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 12:27 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 12:31 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 12:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 13:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 13:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 13:14 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 13:34 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2023-03-03 13:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 14:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 12:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 12:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 12:20 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 12:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 12:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 13:16 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 13:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 13:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 13:58 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 14:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 18:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 19:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-07 20:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08  9:26 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08  9:29 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08  9:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 10:09 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 11:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 11:30 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 14:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 14:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 15:07 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 15:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 16:37 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 18:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-08 20:02 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09  8:52 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09 10:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09 11:06 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09 11:12 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09 11:50 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09 12:34 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09 12:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09 13:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-09 13:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-10  9:08 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-10 11:41 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-22  9:07 ` cvs-commit 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-109008-4-g8mZlaiuH1@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).