public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/96373] SVE miscompilation on vectorized division loop, leading to FP exception Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 11:09:42 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-96373-4-GLeQe9Xs65@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-96373-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Wed, 5 Aug 2020, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373 > > --- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > (In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #7) > > On Wed, 5 Aug 2020, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373 > > > > > > --- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > > > FWIW, I think the reason I mentioned for skimping on this originally > > > was that we don't e.g. prevent if-conversion of: > > > > > > void > > > foo (int *c, float *f) > > > { > > > for (int i = 0; i < 16; ++i) > > > f[i] = c[i] ? __builtin_sqrtf (f[i]) : f[i]; > > > } > > > > > > for -O2 -ftree-vectorize -fno-math-errno. So it seemed like things > > > weren't very consistent. > > > > I think that's a bug in if-conversion - gimple_could_trap_p only > > says that the call instruction itself doesn't trap, it doesn't > > say anything about something in the callee body. > When's that distinction useful in practice though? It seems odd > that an FP x / y is seen as potentially trapping, but a function > call that wraps (or might wrap) an FP x / y isn't. > > > You should need -fno-trapping-math to get the above if-converted. > Is there an existing ECF flag that we can check? ECF_NOTHROW is > related but seems different enough not to be reliable. > > And is trapping a “side effect“ for the purposes of: Yes, I think trapping would be a gimple_has_side_effects effect. No, I don't think NOTRHOW covers this. On GENERIC we have TREE_THIS_NOTRAP but it's not even specified for CALL_EXPR. > /* Nonzero if this is a call to a function whose return value depends > solely on its arguments, has no side effects, and does not read > global memory. This corresponds to TREE_READONLY for function > decls. */ > #define ECF_CONST (1 << 0) > > I.e. can a function still be const (on the basis that a given > argument always produces the same result) while still trapping > for some arguments? What about pure, where the trapping might > come from a memory dereference? How do we represent sNaNs with -fnon-call-exceptions? That is, y_1 = x_2 + 1.; may trap. Does foo (x_2); get transformed to tem_3 = x_2; foo (tem_3); and the SSA assignment now traps dependent on whether the call ABI requires pushing x_2 to a stack slot (which might trap)? sNaNs are odd anyway I guess. But yes, a pure function can still trap (and also throw). I think we don't have a good notion for trappingness of calls and I do expect inconsistencies here.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-05 11:09 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-07-29 15:27 [Bug target/96373] New: " matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-04 13:41 ` [Bug target/96373] " rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-04 13:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-04 14:38 ` matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-04 14:59 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-04 15:46 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org 2020-08-05 10:08 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-05 10:15 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2020-08-05 10:28 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-05 11:09 ` rguenther at suse dot de [this message] 2020-08-05 12:24 ` matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-05 13:02 ` matz at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-11 23:50 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-11 23:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-27 17:04 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-14 2:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-14 9:18 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-27 2:50 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-27 2:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-03 8:58 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-14 8:19 ` [Bug target/96373] [10/11 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-29 10:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-29 5:33 ` [Bug target/96373] [11 " pinskia 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-96373-4-GLeQe9Xs65@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: linkBe 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).