From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 3F2CE3858C31; Wed, 10 May 2023 07:26:57 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3F2CE3858C31 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1683703617; bh=AiBNIWao3IXwNRrJCmETDZcZhvDKqi1bs74MVdrQKf4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=yFSxj/vp6qdhihcz5/956xOWXyXHEKmv9ZZFkyMLofOy5u2ElA9BDbkjIjR94Dnp2 9atIQH38y4Xm7BQOruaw9eSZkGLAEFbQZD5EGCsWR8spabuRGkNsfHWtobSZyFllu5 ro+Ytjd1hXtKtag3OswOZc4kZUI+4E0ImGD4l4UA= From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/109791] -Wstringop-overflow warning with -O3 and _GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0 Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 07:26:56 +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: 12.1.1 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: everconfirmed cc bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109791 Richard Biener changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC| |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org, | |amacleod at redhat dot com, | |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2023-05-10 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Confirmed. This is a missed optimization, we fail to optimize the loop gua= rd [local count: 329643239]: _4 =3D (unsigned long) &MEM [(void *)&str + 2B]; _6 =3D (unsigned long) __i_14; _50 =3D -_6; _100 =3D _4 + 18446744073709551615; _40 =3D _100 - _6; _41 =3D _40 > 13; if (_41 !=3D 0) with __i_14 being [local count: 452186132]: # __i_14 =3D PHI <&MEM [(void *)&str + 1B](10), &MEM [(= void *)&str + 2B](9)> I'll note that the strlen pass runs before VRP (but after DOM), but I'll also note that likely ranger isn't very good with these kind of "symbolic" ranges? How would we handle this? Using two relations, __i_14 >=3D &str + 1 && __i_14 <=3D &str + 2? DOM has Optimizing block #16 1>>> STMT 1 =3D &MEM [(void *)&str + 2B] ge_expr __i_14 1>>> STMT 1 =3D &MEM [(void *)&str + 2B] ne_expr __i_14 1>>> STMT 0 =3D &MEM [(void *)&str + 2B] eq_expr __i_14 1>>> STMT 1 =3D &MEM [(void *)&str + 2B] gt_expr __i_14 1>>> STMT 0 =3D &MEM [(void *)&str + 2B] le_expr __i_14 Optimizing statement _4 =3D (unsigned long) &MEM [(void *)&str + = 2B]; LKUP STMT _4 =3D nop_expr &MEM [(void *)&str + 2B] 2>>> STMT _4 =3D nop_expr &MEM [(void *)&str + 2B] Optimizing statement _6 =3D (unsigned long) __i_14; LKUP STMT _6 =3D nop_expr __i_14 2>>> STMT _6 =3D nop_expr __i_14 Optimizing statement _50 =3D -_6; Registering value_relation (_6 pe64 __i_14) (bb16) at _6 =3D (unsigned lon= g) __i_14; LKUP STMT _50 =3D negate_expr _6 2>>> STMT _50 =3D negate_expr _6 Optimizing statement _100 =3D _4 + 18446744073709551615; LKUP STMT _100 =3D _4 plus_expr 18446744073709551615 2>>> STMT _100 =3D _4 plus_expr 18446744073709551615 Optimizing statement _40 =3D _100 - _6; Registering value_relation (_100 < _4) (bb16) at _100 =3D _4 + 18446744073709551615; LKUP STMT _40 =3D _100 minus_expr _6 2>>> STMT _40 =3D _100 minus_expr _6 Optimizing statement _41 =3D _40 > 13; LKUP STMT _41 =3D _40 gt_expr 13 2>>> STMT _41 =3D _40 gt_expr 13 LKUP STMT _40 le_expr 14 Optimizing statement if (_41 !=3D 0) Visiting conditional with predicate: if (_41 !=3D 0) With known ranges _41: [irange] bool VARYING=