public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "mattiase at acm dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/109637] New: unnecessary range check in complete switch on bitfield Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 18:17:20 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-109637-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109637 Bug ID: 109637 Summary: unnecessary range check in complete switch on bitfield Product: gcc Version: 13.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mattiase at acm dot org Target Milestone: --- This fully populated switch still produces some kind of useless range check: struct S { unsigned x : 2; }; int f (struct S *s) { switch(s->x) { case 0: return 0; case 1: return 1; case 2: return 2; case 3: return 3; } } -> movzbl (%rdi), %eax andl $3, %eax leal -1(%rax), %edx movzbl %al, %eax cmpb $3, %dl movl $0, %edx cmovnb %edx, %eax ret GCC apparently understands that the switch is complete at some level since anything after the switch is recognised as dead code, so the range check is a bit puzzling. The code is fine if we explicitly mask the switch value as in `switch(s->x & 3)`: movzbl (%rdi), %eax andl $3, %eax ret
next reply other threads:[~2023-04-26 18:17 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-04-26 18:17 mattiase at acm dot org [this message] 2023-04-26 18:19 ` [Bug middle-end/109637] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-26 18:28 ` [Bug tree-optimization/109637] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-26 18:52 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-04-26 19:02 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-04-26 19:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-26 19:16 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-08-11 0:17 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-08-11 0:39 ` pinskia 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-109637-4@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).