public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/90094] better handling of x == LONG_MIN on x86-64
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 08:58:26 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-90094-4-hRD6XicdIj@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-90094-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90094

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |uros at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
But then shouldn't we do it not just for equality/non-equality comparisons
against 0x8000000000000000, but also for equality/non-equality comparisons
against 0x7fffffffffffffff or signed non-equality comparisons like >
__LONG_MAX__ - 42
or >= __LONG_MAX__ - 0x7fffff00 etc.

I mean
void fn (void);

unsigned
f1 (long a)
{
  return a == -__LONG_MAX__ - 1;
}

void
f2 (long a)
{
  if (a == -__LONG_MAX__ - 1)
    fn ();
}

unsigned
f3 (long a)
{
  return __builtin_sub_overflow_p (0, a, 0L);
}

void
f4 (long a)
{
  if (__builtin_sub_overflow_p (0, a, 0L))
    fn ();
}

unsigned
f5 (long a)
{
  return a == __LONG_MAX__;
}

void
f6 (long a)
{
  if (a == __LONG_MAX__)
    fn ();
}

unsigned
f7 (long a)
{
  return __builtin_add_overflow_p (a, 1, 0L);
}

void
f8 (long a)
{
  if (__builtin_add_overflow_p (a, 1, 0L))
    fn ();
}

unsigned
f9 (long a)
{
  return a >= __LONG_MAX__ - 42;
}

void
f10 (long a)
{
  if (a >= __LONG_MAX__ - 42)
    fn ();
}

unsigned
f11 (long a)
{
  return __builtin_add_overflow_p (a, 43, 0L);
}

void
f12 (long a)
{
  if (__builtin_add_overflow_p (a, 43, 0L))
    fn ();
}

unsigned
f13 (long a)
{
  return a <= -__LONG_MAX__ + 42;
}

void
f14 (long a)
{
  if (a <= -__LONG_MAX__ + 42)
    fn ();
}

unsigned
f15 (long a)
{
  return __builtin_sub_overflow_p (a, 43, 0L);
}

void
f16 (long a)
{
  if (__builtin_sub_overflow_p (a, 43, 0L))
    fn ();
}

The question if it should be done in the cstoredi4 and cbranchdi4 expanders, or
matched later say during combine, or peephole2.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-06-14  8:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-90094-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2021-07-25  1:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-06-14  6:11 ` eggert at cs dot ucla.edu
2023-06-14  8:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2023-06-14  9:00 ` jakub 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-90094-4-hRD6XicdIj@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).