public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] lower-bitint: Handle unreleased SSA_NAMEs from earlier passes gracefully [PR113102]
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 09:17:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZYVGEs0RMZelMjez@tucnak> (raw)

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?

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


             reply	other threads:[~2023-12-22  8:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-12-22  8:17 Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2023-12-22 10:08 ` Richard Biener

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=ZYVGEs0RMZelMjez@tucnak \
    --to=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=rguenther@suse.de \
    /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).