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 A00B9388E81F; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 09:35:27 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A00B9388E81F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1593423327;
 bh=iS6NVDg3+xLjVHFwlte7TVGKQuS5LlUfBc0kW0wd4dI=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=K+8NbxCtR5RKBJ1LAwKgpWK98mdNpaeabc2xTrCzrDIAKeCmMXZLKGeReds6vfOsX
 IzaVOrUUEjWTewfGERnGDvEa1OOXpZjJAf0lvcImZHKZ8fR7vgecLnQxE9MWx0ejW6
 AQnR86/fA5xtQVQXpKAZu5LSkm6MDKiIc5UyM05s=
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/95903] gcc 10: wrong code with -fwrapv
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 09:35:23 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-95903-4-zyj5YSOo9T@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-95903-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-95903-4@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: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 09:35:27 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95903

--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
<jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e29959c5fcd6c37b426c2939d7ba0c199b40d1ac

commit r10-8384-ge29959c5fcd6c37b426c2939d7ba0c199b40d1ac
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Sat Jun 27 12:38:23 2020 +0200

    c-family: Use TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED instead of !TYPE_UNSIGNED in
pointer_sum [PR95903]

    For lp64 targets and int off ... ptr[off + 1]
    is lowered in pointer_sum to *(ptr + ((sizetype) off + (sizetype) 1)).
    That is fine when signed integer wrapping is undefined (and is not done
    already if off has unsigned type), but changes behavior for -fwrapv, wh=
ere
    overflow is well defined.  Runtime test could be:
    int
    main ()
    {
      char *p =3D __builtin_malloc (0x100000000UL);
      if (!p) return 0;
      char *q =3D p + 0x80000000UL;
      int o =3D __INT_MAX__;
      q[o + 1] =3D 1;
      if (q[-__INT_MAX__ - 1] !=3D 1) __builtin_abort ();
      return 0;
    }
    with -fwrapv or so, not included in the testsuite because it requires 4=
GB
    allocation (with some other test it would be enough to have something
    slightly above 2GB, but still...).

    2020-06-27  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

            PR middle-end/95903
    gcc/c-family/
            * c-common.c (pointer_int_sum): Use TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED ins=
tead
of
            !TYPE_UNSIGNED check to see if we can apply distributive law and
handle
            smaller precision intop operands separately.
    gcc/testsuite/
            * c-c++-common/pr95903.c: New test.

    (cherry picked from commit 37995960984ea2222346dd9d168d332cd6f7adf0)=