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 461EB385DC12; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:00:18 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 461EB385DC12
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1587132018;
 bh=FGH4252j+KRAKARC+cIL526OQQywLXUUD+bVz49F/Xs=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=oyHZ9qOn/tw9yKoTxb2gtM40Zj22y3bnPaI+fCs9Tpocw8Hi0yTxsPm44YMot8iSP
 ZPIANAkIdS5PyAdGoiEZSnwI2jVh9l9aULQam+kMRdf+4TCrvxSPpgwxGzHp6DHvts
 r4SSNJdplZvAg9LrpJrvvodz++lpwieLP5gxj/Dg=
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/93385] [10 Regression] wrong code with u128 modulo at -O2
 -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:00:18 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-93385-4-p6YXLRcx9H@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-93385-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-93385-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:00:18 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D93385

--- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On April 17, 2020 3:53:07 PM GMT+02:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org"
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D93385
>
>--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>Instead of #c11 I meant:
>-       else if ((is_gimple_assign (stmt) && !gimple_has_volatile_ops
>(stmt))
>-                || gimple_code (stmt) =3D=3D GIMPLE_PHI)
>+       else if (flag_tree_dce
>+                && ((is_gimple_assign (stmt) &&
>!gimple_has_volatile_ops
>(stmt))
>+                    || gimple_code (stmt) =3D=3D GIMPLE_PHI))
>because the res =3D -1 handling is in the else after this already.
>
>For what Richi is proposing, I guess one needs to run the analysis
>somewhere
>(early tree_function_versioning or elsewhere?, note in a hash_set stmts
>that
>shouldn't be copied, add pointer to that hash_set to copy_body_data and
>perhaps
>in remap_gimple_stmt if the hash_set pointer is non-NULL, check early
>if stmt
>is in it and in that case return NULL (like we already return NULL for
>debug
>stmts if we want to drop them).
>Most likely the lhs of such to be removed statements need to be also
>added to
>id.killed_new_ssa_names (and verify if it works properly).

I'd definitely make sure to map supposed to be DCEd defs to error_mark_node=
.=20

For the marking one could add id.plf_to_dce and clear/set the plf on the st=
mts.=