From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6279 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2017 16:07:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 6261 invoked by uid 89); 5 Apr 2017 16:07:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-15.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_1,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 16:07:31 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8777804FE for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 16:07:31 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com C8777804FE Authentication-Results: ext-mx03.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx03.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=vmakarov@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com C8777804FE Received: from [10.10.123.183] (ovpn-123-183.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.123.183]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87F755C54B for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 16:07:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: patch to fix PR70703 To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <92d87dc9-0d07-4540-55cd-eca8177ae533@redhat.com> <20170405152500.GT17461@tucnak> From: Vladimir Makarov Message-ID: <36aee908-ddad-4524-c7c6-d52c2567847a@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 16:07:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170405152500.GT17461@tucnak> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-04/txt/msg00236.txt.bz2 On 04/05/2017 11:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:11:54AM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: >> --- ira-color.c (revision 246536) >> +++ ira-color.c (working copy) >> @@ -1367,6 +1367,16 @@ update_costs_from_allocno (ira_allocno_t >> || ALLOCNO_ASSIGNED_P (another_allocno)) >> continue; >> >> + if (GET_MODE_SIZE (ALLOCNO_MODE (cp->second)) < GET_MODE_SIZE (mode)) >> + /* If we have different modes use the smallest one. It is >> + a sub-register move. It is hard to predict what LRA >> + will reload (the pseudo or its sub-register) but LRA >> + will try to minimize the data movement. Also for some >> + register classes bigger modes might be invalid, >> + e.g. DImode for AREG on x86. For such cases the >> + register move cost will be maximal. */ >> + mode = ALLOCNO_MODE (cp->second); >> + >> cost = (cp->second == allocno >> ? ira_register_move_cost[mode][rclass][aclass] >> : ira_register_move_cost[mode][aclass][rclass]); >> @@ -1512,7 +1522,7 @@ update_conflict_hard_regno_costs (int *c >> index = ira_class_hard_reg_index[aclass][hard_regno]; >> if (index < 0) >> continue; >> - cost = (int) ((unsigned) conflict_costs [i] * mult) / div; >> + cost = (int) (((long) conflict_costs [i] * mult) / div); > If you want something wider than unsigned, wouldn't it be better to > use HOST_WIDE_INT then? Otherwise it will work differently between > 32-bit and 64-bit hosts. > Can any of those 3 values be negative? If not, perhaps > unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT? > Thank you for finding this, Jakub. The overflow might happen only when 65K is used for ira_register_move_cost which means an impossible move in most cases. Still if it happens in rare cases, the behavior might be different for the native and a cross. I'll correct the patch.