From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23463 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2013 21:18:13 -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 23446 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jun 2013 21:18:12 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 21:18:10 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1Um9Tc-0004f4-A8 from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:18:08 -0700 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.104]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:18:08 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 22:18:06 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Um9TY-00042A-Tk; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 21:18:05 +0000 Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 21:18:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: "Iyer, Balaji V" CC: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Jakub Jelinek , "mpolacek@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57563 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00535.txt.bz2 On Mon, 10 Jun 2013, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > I looked into it a bit more detail. It was an error on my side. I was > removing the excess precision expr layer instead of fully folding it. I > did that change (i.e. fully fold the expression) and all the errors seem > to go away. Here is the fixed patch that fixes PR c/57563. It passes for > 32 bit and 64 bit tests. Here are the changelog entries: This version is better, but if removing an EXCESS_PRECISION_EXPR there caused problems, why is it OK to remove CONVERT_EXPR and NOP_EXPR like you still do - won't that also cause type mismatches (at least if the conversions are to types that count as sufficiently different for GIMPLE purposes - say conversions between 32-bit and 64-bit integers)? Maybe you actually need to fold without removing any such wrappers first at all? -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com