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 AD0163858C53; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 16:11:38 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AD0163858C53
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1690819898;
	bh=w5s0ivUqJc0My++y5pVEZ1e2cxHfWJQ+k9HnmiTO/Hg=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=ocfu2DbVUXtmhqAHaG9zSOc4kkFlJhP3eA8todruMS4jE+ABrFATSREGxUsIpGlSn
	 q5jvqCOvGOo/1xvrFIyPbXr2TK15HeLLFgdL5cpdzO1hcwWf++LD0NxXiqg6mgJo9F
	 st/sL1W+4gtQzAEDVyS8TTxWcGRy+kBWlkXmegL4=
From: "amacleod at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/110582] [14 Regression] Wrong code at -O2/3
 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 16:11:38 +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: amacleod at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-110582-4-DdAOlNvDWN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-110582-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-110582-4@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=3D110582

Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> ---
There was a bug in the implementation of fur_list where it was using the
supplied values for *any* encountered operand, not just ssa_names.   so when
the phi analyzer was trying to find an initial value fro the PHI a_lsm.2_29=
 it
was miscalculating the value of iftmp.1_15 and thought it had an (incorrect)
limited range of [-2,2].

 # a_lsm.12_29 =3D PHI <iftmp.1_11(4)>
  iftmp.1_15 =3D 3 / a_lsm.12_29;=20

it then though it could fold away the condition.

The patch adjusts the operand fetcher to work properly, and then the phi
analyzer calcualtes the range for the statement properly, and we can no lon=
ger
remove the condtion.=