From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-338706-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 3761 invoked by alias); 28 Nov 2010 15:07:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 3751 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Nov 2010 15:07:54 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,TW_ZJ
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:07:50 +0000
From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/46675] [4.6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.6.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-46675-4-NO3WaeDViY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-46675-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-46675-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:46:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-11/txt/msg03439.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46675

--- Comment #14 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2010-11-28 15:07:39 UTC ---
Hm, no. The patch in comment #13 is not correct fix.

However, the comment of bound_difference says that no overflows are assumed:

/* Stores the bounds on the value of the expression X - Y in LOOP to BNDS.
   The subtraction is considered to be performed in arbitrary precision,
   without overflows.

   We do not attempt to be too clever regarding the value ranges of X and
   Y; most of the time, they are just integers or ssa names offsetted by
   integer.  However, we try to use the information contained in the
   comparisons before the loop (usually created by loop header copying).  */

static void
bound_difference (struct loop *loop, tree x, tree y, bounds *bnds)

And we have an overflow here (slightly modified test):

--cut here--
#define OFFS 1

extern void abort (void);

int j;

void
__attribute__((noinline))
foo (int n)
{
  int npairs, i;
  npairs = n - (-__INT_MAX__ - OFFS);

  if (npairs > 0)
    for (i = 0; i < npairs; i++)
      j++;
}

int
main ()
{
  foo (5 - __INT_MAX__ - OFFS);

  if (j != 5)
    abort ();

  return 0;
}
--cut here--


An interesting fact, the testcase is miscompiled only for OFFS={1,2,3}.