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 C55073858C5F; Thu,  1 Jun 2023 01:55:26 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C55073858C5F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1685584526;
	bh=qqnBuQ05S/WRpHO0zyNBjlIuEo6Xbfjx+LNXDFgmSW0=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=NaRfOk9VsmHkBsoi1xtBxMZ5eLzromjtP6/SIOoScDHzC4BdD7Fo8xg4evIKgceNt
	 GP4+fL9tbo+4WyDxirz4OW/kfS1R0f7INHVyIY2XtD/6u7Vor2Y5NLyNT8jtQTo66o
	 g3IVBbndv04jO8BFFPfXhgBQJxmZvtUfuKZJEpPY=
From: "crazylht at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/110067] [14 Regression] Wrong code on
 pixman-0.42.2
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2023 01:55:26 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: needs-bisection, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: crazylht at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-110067-4-C9gdUdc2XL@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-110067-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-110067-4@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=3D110067

--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu <crazylht at gmail dot com> ---
For=20
    br64 =3D br;
    br64 =3D ((br64 << 16) & 0x000000ff00000000ull) | (br64 & 0x0000ff00ull=
);

n->n is  0x3000000200.
n->range is 32.
n->type is uint64.

Currently the code assumes n->range is same as TYPE PRECISION(n->type), and
tries to rotate the mask with below code and get new mask as 0x20300 which =
is
incorrect.=20
tmp_n =3D tmp_n >> count | tmp_n << (range - count)

--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu <crazylht at gmail dot com> ---
For=20
    br64 =3D br;
    br64 =3D ((br64 << 16) & 0x000000ff00000000ull) | (br64 & 0x0000ff00ull=
);

n->n is  0x3000000200.
n->range is 32.
n->type is uint64.

Currently the code assumes n->range is same as TYPE PRECISION(n->type), and
tries to rotate the mask with below code and get new mask as 0x20300 which =
is
incorrect.=20
tmp_n =3D tmp_n >> count | tmp_n << (range - count)=