From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [209.51.188.92]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 457E8385842A for ; Tue, 14 May 2024 17:08:55 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 457E8385842A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 457E8385842A Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.51.188.92 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1715706539; cv=none; b=Au4tx9GDLCrEYAcITC/EWPOxZi2Ulru8nkuiIfB5F8lWuSnN+2xIwhjeHJL9jW7mbkvLkJRSxz3WS2X/MaX/97VUZF/+z8NydjY5pGyTQsmZoWKRnzMZPlNrXto14+sOconycHxonQzFA67IatvUjONInZLNOclSpSath9IInfU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1715706539; c=relaxed/simple; bh=FcyN+CI0NeSoa1YxwbLzllwBM0zIbsPF7q+qrcf6fws=; h=DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From; b=ARXg0fNFF5N4qU0w9lQem3wKjcIh9HZk1NAorvqNIS6M1bQR8LBlfrnD7My5Yt/O7Fi0JyxLH5BOlLXlf2VGGD9AyCkKWY+WwFBokvsmXSAmN3evip8GJBg0vG4pFocHGdpo+ThlDqx4+y/gL8VCBu5Y63zGiG2Za+LDwxuVZfs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s4zRh-00040R-Px for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Thu, 09 May 2024 04:48:12 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0356516.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 4497OXnT007776; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:48:00 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=CUWjB2AYnRqMtu4TqMXmxHerRAVSWs/Y3IqJpgUt0m4=; b=AXig7FqYL949MHjIA98qV+Qo1yL2gFyyyCAAfnabi+MlaWItCSvMmqLwLdifYTqmEy2+ 1wCX8VSL4i4SNUHDF5lKjmllVmEZ9GkhNCrXuQnIF2MRWVWQ8ngnblwYvbT0iArXbeck vB/YYZuF+Rjfw3lOS23iM4s1lDU4C7tgEnNjlzAI5BrRMNK6y7act1sCNGsfuLd2P2r5 Lu/wwho8TNtuIgKuhl8ZdDv73YIr8Lb+V3c5pnkFhNugkhhyZN/zgpcoBRW0AqZ7Iqlj Wn6kFII7cMP0YDJpy+Xp0FYRXYW17+73JLnOuZwMOck+KiGkcGbIljSxYhZsaNNAEy+3 gg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3y0scr09m3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 09 May 2024 08:47:59 +0000 Received: from m0356516.ppops.net (m0356516.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 4498lxw9010240; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:47:59 GMT Received: from ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (db.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.219]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3y0scr09kx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 09 May 2024 08:47:59 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 4498RuOd017387; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:47:58 GMT Received: from smtprelay05.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.225]) by ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3xysht1sua-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 09 May 2024 08:47:58 +0000 Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.101]) by smtprelay05.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 4498lrTV51642708 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 9 May 2024 08:47:55 GMT Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03DC72004B; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:47:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF36720040; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:47:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.200.103.244] (unknown [9.200.103.244]) by smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:47:50 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <544aed62-5060-4421-b925-a9a4780c40fb@linux.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 16:47:49 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] Value range: Add range op for __builtin_isfinite To: Mikael Morin , gcc-patches Cc: Segher Boessenkool , David , "Kewen.Lin" , Peter Bergner , Aldy Hernandez References: <8a3f96a3-ce9b-48dc-b125-eaf1d832c79d@linux.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: HAO CHEN GUI In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: fjqqIpT2KvKuDVenENbDJZ3lBsgcV72k X-Proofpoint-GUID: OZagq7AQky3OaWWcweH5dRwzoejf3dDO X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.650,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-05-09_04,2024-05-08_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=884 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2405010000 definitions=main-2405090056 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.158.5; envelope-from=guihaoc@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9,DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,DKIM_VALID=-0.1,DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001,SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi Mikael, Thanks for your comments. 在 2024/5/9 16:03, Mikael Morin 写道: > I think the canonical API behaviour sets R to varying and returns true instead of just returning false if nothing is known about the range. > > I'm not sure whether it makes any difference; Aldy can probably tell. But if the type is bool, varying is [0,1] which is better than unknown range. Should the varying be set by caller when fold_range returns false? Just like following codes in value-query.cc. if (!op.fold_range (r, type, r0, r1)) r.set_varying (type); Thanks Gui Haochen