From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-509197-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 23159 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2019 09:01:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23146 invoked by uid 89); 18 Sep 2019 09:01:06 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*f:sk:mptr24e, H*i:sk:mptr24e
X-HELO: mail-lf1-f45.google.com
Received: from mail-lf1-f45.google.com (HELO mail-lf1-f45.google.com) (209.85.167.45) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:01:05 +0000
Received: by mail-lf1-f45.google.com with SMTP id u3so5064731lfl.10        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 02:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=gmail.com; s=20161025;        h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to         :cc;        bh=uCV4edHM7wWpc5WGz6u9tUGd7YA0XHVImlvet05OFYE=;        b=rT+uVS6pkfcqB9SZ9KMqWOVPTySnHzufpV7eX5DmHZZgNyndvqIiawcn7notXkmu+F         yKk2mcO5zAnnhJihhVo20fk+RGf8E6So0mtal+dacwii6ML1FW6i0rDKisREU/u+g0qt         2p9sb3ljDpmJPUhZ2XoJlV/DYxBjq1DUJJrzAG8WHNfiDDcuXI5EHovl/vAj6IgnLxhy         3kD4mqH0O6EaRlUkfviM3mcHvmjfsTDvJwpiPzwPaD7goSNDy2Uew9pQj+RUpyX9FVKV         KukqFVz8dAO9r9Fw46g4GIeQvq5iIAnGnZd1S1LJPxMFxBpCCRcGnPt4UHw5Cl3keg2J         WSSA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <mptr24e14d1.fsf@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <mptr24e14d1.fsf@arm.com>
From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:01:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc3L2gyS072bAC8y-jdZcdHJkXy17F84KE=Ve7Xiyb=Gow@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Make get_value_for_expr check for INTEGER_CSTs
To: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2019-09/txt/msg01088.txt.bz2

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 8:54 AM Richard Sandiford
<richard.sandiford@arm.com> wrote:
>
> CONSTANT lattice values are symbolic constants rather than
> compile-time constants, so among other things can be POLY_INT_CSTs.
> This patch fixes a case in which we assumed all CONSTANTs were either
> ADDR_EXPRs or INTEGER_CSTs.
>
> This is tested by later SVE patches.
>
> Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu with SVE (with and without follow-on
> patches) and x86_64-linux-gnu.  OK to install?

OK.

Richard.

> Richard
>
>
> 2019-09-18  Richard Sandiford  <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
>
> gcc/
>         * tree-ssa-ccp.c (get_value_for_expr): Check whether CONSTANTs
>         are INTEGER_CSTs.
>
> Index: gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c  2019-08-21 14:58:05.999057076 +0100
> +++ gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c  2019-09-18 07:53:36.930481545 +0100
> @@ -615,9 +615,17 @@ get_value_for_expr (tree expr, bool for_
>           val.mask = -1;
>         }
>        if (for_bits_p
> -         && val.lattice_val == CONSTANT
> -         && TREE_CODE (val.value) == ADDR_EXPR)
> -       val = get_value_from_alignment (val.value);
> +         && val.lattice_val == CONSTANT)
> +       {
> +         if (TREE_CODE (val.value) == ADDR_EXPR)
> +           val = get_value_from_alignment (val.value);
> +         else if (TREE_CODE (val.value) != INTEGER_CST)
> +           {
> +             val.lattice_val = VARYING;
> +             val.value = NULL_TREE;
> +             val.mask = -1;
> +           }
> +       }
>        /* Fall back to a copy value.  */
>        if (!for_bits_p
>           && val.lattice_val == VARYING