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.

  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: link
Be 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).