From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lower-bitint: Handle unreleased SSA_NAMEs from earlier passes gracefully [PR113102]
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 11:08:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <C0A79F6A-7EC2-4B35-B7BE-3A42970B7406@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZYVGEs0RMZelMjez@tucnak>
> Am 22.12.2023 um 09:17 schrieb Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>:
>
> Hi!
>
> On the following testcase earlier passes leave around an unreleased
> SSA_NAME - non-GIMPLE_NOP SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT which isn't in any bb.
> The following patch makes bitint lowering resistent against those,
> the first hunk is where we'd for certain kinds of stmts try to ammend
> them and the latter is where we'd otherwise try to remove them,
> neither of which works. The other loops over all SSA_NAMEs either
> already also check gimple_bb (SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (s)) or it doesn't
> matter that much if we process it or not (worst case it means e.g.
> the pass wouldn't return early even when it otherwise could).
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
Ok
> 2023-12-22 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>
> PR tree-optimization/113102
> * gimple-lower-bitint.cc (gimple_lower_bitint): Handle unreleased
> large/huge _BitInt SSA_NAMEs.
>
> * gcc.dg/bitint-59.c: New test.
>
> --- gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc.jj 2023-12-21 13:28:56.953120687 +0100
> +++ gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc 2023-12-21 14:08:00.199704511 +0100
> @@ -5827,7 +5827,7 @@ gimple_lower_bitint (void)
> tree_code rhs_code;
> /* Unoptimize certain constructs to simpler alternatives to
> avoid having to lower all of them. */
> - if (is_gimple_assign (stmt))
> + if (is_gimple_assign (stmt) && gimple_bb (stmt))
> switch (rhs_code = gimple_assign_rhs_code (stmt))
> {
> default:
> @@ -6690,6 +6690,11 @@ gimple_lower_bitint (void)
> release_ssa_name (s);
> continue;
> }
> + if (gimple_bb (g) == NULL)
> + {
> + release_ssa_name (s);
> + continue;
> + }
> if (gimple_code (g) != GIMPLE_ASM)
> {
> gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_for_stmt (g);
> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitint-59.c.jj 2023-12-21 14:12:01.860350727 +0100
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitint-59.c 2023-12-21 14:11:54.766449179 +0100
> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> +/* PR tree-optimization/113102 */
> +/* { dg-do compile { target bitint } } */
> +/* { dg-options "-std=c23 -O2" } */
> +
> +unsigned x;
> +
> +#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 191
> +void
> +foo (void)
> +{
> + unsigned _BitInt(191) b = x;
> + ~(b >> x) % 3;
> +}
> +#endif
>
> Jakub
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-22 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-22 8:17 Jakub Jelinek
2023-12-22 10:08 ` Richard Biener [this message]
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=C0A79F6A-7EC2-4B35-B7BE-3A42970B7406@suse.de \
--to=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
/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: link
Be 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).