public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/113026] Bogus -Wstringop-overflow warning on simple memcpy type loop Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 09:24:57 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-113026-4-vC7qyx2Tv9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-113026-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113026 Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Keywords| |missed-optimization Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed| |2023-12-15 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- We are diagnosing the scalar store in the epilogue of the vectorized "loop" where we somehow optimized the vector loop to terminate immediately (based on dst[] size I guess) and also peeled the epilogue but failed to eliminate that completely (but then -Wstringop-overflow correctly figures the access would be out-of-bounds). A bit reduced (interestingly when avoiding versioning for aliasing we manage to avoid the diagnostic because of the way we re-use the epilog when n < 16 char dst[16]; void foo (char *src, long n) { for (long i = 0; i < n; i++) dst[i] = src[i]; } in the end this is a missed optimization. We do know an upper bound for the loop so we should have disabled epilog peeling based on that. The peeling code assumes the vector loop can be skipped (niter < vf) only when we either vectorize the epilogue or do not version the loop while the code computing wheter we need peeling takes into account the versioning cost model threshold only.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-15 9:24 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-12-14 21:42 [Bug tree-optimization/113026] New: " bergner at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-14 21:47 ` [Bug tree-optimization/113026] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-15 9:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-12-15 10:20 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-15 13:10 ` avieira at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-18 7:14 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2024-01-08 13:52 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-08 13:54 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-09 12:37 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-20 18:38 ` 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-113026-4-vC7qyx2Tv9@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).