From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dragonfly.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (dragonfly.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.51]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6843C3858412 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:12:45 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 6843C3858412 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gotplt.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gotplt.org X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10CD988935A; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:12:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a304.dreamhost.com (unknown [127.0.0.6]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id DE5CB8872D5; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:12:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a304.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by 100.100.11.82 (trex/6.4.3); Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:12:40 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Arithmetic-Print: 3a22ead062904399_1639588359667_2770388383 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1639588359667:1144655500 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1639588359667 Received: from [192.168.52.116] (unknown [223.185.62.238]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: siddhesh@gotplt.org) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a304.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4JDhdG33LBz18t; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:12:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gotplt.org; s=gotplt.org; t=1639588355; bh=6Bz4LZPUDxH5oBixvLK9wsB57cA=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:From:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=tgcD/gwljSWwPOQqFANGbBOPV2RUfaTspPnyG4Mo5pPLImofCvgajoXya4MZg0OsX YOwa9L0CULj9cp1V+bZ3OqAP5v5sWYg8jltmfGPShODmMZkfL7dN9tD5NXpeWyQdKr Lm3kXaKiwTmqGZ7G7D1VD2NulHM6j0RyZh4tRKu4= Message-ID: <873ad5ef-2d95-4f11-bb4e-b82fa2a1ddf2@gotplt.org> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 22:42:29 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] tree-object-size: Use trees and support negative offsets Content-Language: en-US To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <20211109190137.1107736-1-siddhesh@gotplt.org> <20211201142757.4086840-1-siddhesh@gotplt.org> <20211201142757.4086840-2-siddhesh@gotplt.org> <20211215152151.GJ2646553@tucnak> From: Siddhesh Poyarekar In-Reply-To: <20211215152151.GJ2646553@tucnak> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3031.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:12:50 -0000 On 12/15/21 20:51, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Shouldn't this also tree_int_cst_compare (old_wholeval, wholeval) ? > AFAICT, there is no situation where wholeval changes but val doesn't, so I believe the val check should be sufficient. Do you think otherwise? Siddhesh