public inbox for
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] Be careful with MODE_CC in simplify_const_relational_operation.
@ 2022-07-07 21:08 Roger Sayle
  2022-07-07 22:38 ` Segher Boessenkool
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Roger Sayle @ 2022-07-07 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-patches; +Cc: 'Segher Boessenkool'

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2567 bytes --]

I think it's fair to describe RTL's representation of condition flags
using MODE_CC as a little counter-intuitive.  For example, the i386
backend represents the carry flag (in adc instructions) using RTL of
the form "(ltu:SI (reg:CCC) (const_int 0))", where great care needs
to be taken not to treat this like a normal RTX expression, after all
LTU (less-than-unsigned) against const0_rtx would normally always be
false.  Hence, MODE_CC comparisons need to be treated with caution,
and simplify_const_relational_operation returns early (to avoid
problems) when GET_MODE_CLASS (GET_MODE (op0)) == MODE_CC.

However, consider the (currently) hypothetical situation, where the
RTL optimizers determine that a previous instruction unconditionally
sets or clears the carry flag, and this gets propagated by combine into
the above expression, we'd end up with something that looks like
(ltu:SI (const_int 1) (const_int 0)), which doesn't mean what it says.
Fortunately, simplify_const_relational_operation is passed the
original mode of the comparison (cmp_mode, the original mode of op0)
which can be checked for MODE_CC, even when op0 is now VOIDmode
(const_int) after the substitution.  Defending against this is clearly the
right thing to do.

More controversially, rather than just abort simplification/optimization
in this case, we can use the comparison operator to infer/select the
semantics of the CC_MODE flag.  Hopefully, whenever a backend uses LTU,
it represents the (set) carry flag (and behaves like, in which
case the result of the simplified expression is the first operand.
[If there's no standardization of semantics across backends, then
we should always just return 0; but then miss potential optimizations].

This patch has been tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with make bootstrap
and make -k check, both with and without --target_board=unix{-m32},
with no new failures, and in combination with a i386 backend patch
(that introduces support for x86's stc and clc instructions) where it
avoids failures.  However, I'm submitting this middle-end piece
independently, to confirm that maintainers/reviewers are happy with
the approach, and also to check there are no issues on other platforms,
before building upon this infrastructure.

Thoughts?  Ok for mainline?

2022-07-07  Roger Sayle  <>

        * (simplify_const_relational_operation): Handle
        case where both operands of a MODE_CC comparison have been
        simplified to constant integers.

Thanks in advance,

[-- Attachment #2: patchcf.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 752 bytes --]

diff --git a/gcc/ b/gcc/
index fa20665..73ec5c7 100644
--- a/gcc/
+++ b/gcc/
@@ -6026,6 +6026,18 @@ simplify_const_relational_operation (enum rtx_code code,
 	return 0;
+  /* Handle MODE_CC comparisons that have been simplified to
+     constants.  */
+  if (GET_MODE_CLASS (mode) == MODE_CC
+      && op1 == const0_rtx
+      && CONST_INT_P (op0))
+    {
+      /* LTU represents the carry flag.  */
+      if (code == LTU)
+	return op0 == const0_rtx ? const0_rtx : const_true_rtx;
+      return 0;
+    }
   /* We can't simplify MODE_CC values since we don't know what the
      actual comparison is.  */
   if (GET_MODE_CLASS (GET_MODE (op0)) == MODE_CC)

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2022-10-14 21:06 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-07-07 21:08 [PATCH] Be careful with MODE_CC in simplify_const_relational_operation Roger Sayle
2022-07-07 22:38 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-07-26 12:13   ` [PATCH] Add new target hook: simplify_modecc_const Roger Sayle
2022-07-26 17:44     ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-07-26 21:04       ` Roger Sayle
2022-07-26 22:11         ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-07-27  7:51           ` Roger Sayle
2022-07-27 18:37             ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-07-28 12:39         ` Richard Sandiford
2022-10-10 15:50           ` H.J. Lu
2022-10-14 20:31             ` Jeff Law
2022-10-14 21:05               ` H.J. Lu
2022-10-14 20:26       ` Jeff Law

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).