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 8408F384AB4F; Fri, 31 May 2024 15:04:41 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 8408F384AB4F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1717167881;
	bh=cr4M5XDoi0I/r/PNOXIXxcYzJ3gwc89dUg7BoXYlH1s=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=j/XKAjcqAik2W8t7/d46vQg+Rz+/7mDGfjWoJn7OJyci2fLtmgWXMcpEhwl3Yo7mn
	 1o+mkI1WgjMEGuTmxn88KkBm7zH8xjbRuIwGpwIDn+PVgewmMcJCSVK7iuE5WAE3Az
	 xxczSlud8pUuZVBEx7DJbBmemb8pjAs8OUl/1p+M=
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/115298] [15 Regression] Various targets
 failing DSE tests after recent changes
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 15:04:39 +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: 15.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: testsuite-fail
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 15.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-115298-4-pLUlXljuqI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-115298-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-115298-4@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=3D115298

--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Fri, 31 May 2024, law at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D115298
>=20
> --- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law <law at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> What still doesn't make sense is why nds32 would be special here.  It doe=
sn't
> do anything special with flag_delete_null_pointer_checks and I don't thin=
k it
> uses any of the address space hooks.  So why does nds32 behave differentl=
y than
> x86?

/* Implement TARGET_OPTION_OPTIMIZATION_TABLE.  */=20
static const struct default_options nds32_option_optimization_table[] =3D
{=20=20
#if TARGET_LINUX_ABI =3D=3D 0
  /* Disable -fdelete-null-pointer-checks by default in ELF toolchain.  */
  { OPT_LEVELS_ALL,               OPT_fdelete_null_pointer_checks,
                                                           NULL, 0 },
#endif

that's in common/config/nds32/nds32-common.cc, a place to easily
overlook.  So it should be nds32-elf only.  And yeah, points-to
should use TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_ZERO_ADDRESS_VALID but since it tracks
pointers across integer conversions we have to decide on integer
zero as well where we do not know what address-space is affected.
I guess we could use the default address space and try to be clever
with ADDR_SPACE_CONVERT.  So points-to only checks=20
flag_delete_null_pointer_checks at the moment.=