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 980063858C53; Thu, 20 Jul 2023 23:46:43 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 980063858C53
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1689896803;
	bh=uL1ioVgJB+T0oaOlE0pM0KO4vB3M9Le/Su1JmqjSnEs=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=KysoLwhea0BLcXAdbohq703DEB5YUwB52EeFxcBdrBdKNp2a5TuVpw558DJjG2Aw0
	 XByNYpm6hCQTvxWHUcjZnyn5tRO9drvvFlQ1WhlhSmX/I20WxZHmIcKAvKw6jx4Dz6
	 6Q6ufaAr5+3bXdyrMLfjBQgHQ82DQ/H32RhUdfmc=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/110760] slp introduces new overflow
 arithmetic
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 23:46:43 +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: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
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: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-110760-4-dDD9CfOPtC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-110760-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-110760-4@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=3D110760

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Krister Walfridsson from comment #3)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > I thought we decided that vector types don't apply the overflow rules a=
nd
> > always just wrap ...
>=20
> That makes sense. But on the other hand, PR 110495 is a similar issue, and
> that was fixed...
>=20
> And TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS should return true for integer vectors if they
> always wrap (or is it only valid for scalars? But ANY_INTEGRAL_TYPE_P is
> careful to handle vectors and complex numbers too, so I thought the
> ANY_INTEGRAL_TYPE_CHECK in TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS means that it work for
> vectors too).

That is slightly different, it was introducing -2(OVF) too.=