From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5E0F3858C2D for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 20:13:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org E5E0F3858C2D Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1675455218; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:resent-to:resent-from:resent-message-id: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=T7PwMkD6uotVsj98NL1tFr8djlY2SrVkyxLjlMtxXwo=; b=Wzwqj0Mdy/ud2nEQObMleh/n2G8uPRo7Nb2cxqbYsDvw2w1CsSsX718ViX40Mx4b2MszwV 15VEv+xwNnmAAh/YdqmODb0CK9d2/PQgrCHxWKA8zcKvUS8nwSyFkafbIpW3NZxNrFo4wi n5ZJq1KHkhQo/k88Uwn5ZXqVnDkIJkA= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-180-cTp5kKo-MTyPVxcGo5qr1A-1; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 15:13:37 -0500 X-MC-Unique: cTp5kKo-MTyPVxcGo5qr1A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BE2E85CBE7 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 20:13:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.192.223]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1529112132C; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 20:13:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 313KDYJx1415119 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 3 Feb 2023 21:13:35 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 313KDYrR1415118; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 21:13:34 +0100 Resent-From: Jakub Jelinek Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 21:13:34 +0100 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-To: Andrew MacLeod , GCC patches Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 19:28:42 +0100 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Aldy Hernandez Cc: Andrew MacLeod , GCC patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] range-ops: Handle undefined ranges in frange op[12]_range [PR108647] Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20230203180918.6417-1-aldyh@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20230203180918.6417-1-aldyh@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.3 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 07:09:18PM +0100, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > This patch gracefully handles undefined operand ranges for the floating > point op[12]_range operators. This is very low risk, as we would have > ICEd otherwise. > > We don't have a testcase that ICEs for floating point ranges, but it's > only a matter of time. Besides, this dovetails nicely with the integer > versions Jakub is testing. LGTM (even bootstrapped/regtested this successfully on i686-linux). Jakub