public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Glen Nakamura <glen@imodulo.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, Subject: Re: optimization/8613: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression] -O2 optimization generates wrong code Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 09:16:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20030219091601.6838.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) The following reply was made to PR optimization/8613; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Glen Nakamura <glen@imodulo.com> To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, mark.odonohue@cytopia.com.au Cc: Subject: Re: optimization/8613: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression] -O2 optimization generates wrong code Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:10:09 -1000 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8613 I've tracked this bug down to a problem with postincrements and the strlen builtin function. What happens is that the postincrement code isn't emitted before the builtin strlen function is expanded and gets emitted within the loop created by ix86_expand_strlensi_unroll_1. This causes the postincrement code to be executed multiple times when calculating the string length. The fix is to call emit_queue before expanding the strlen builtin so the postincrement code is emitted outside of the loop. I'm not exactly sure where the emit_queue call should be placed. Although adding emit_queue to expand_builtin_strlen would work, I added it to expand_builtin instead, because other builtins may have the same problem. It passed regression testing on i686-pc-linux-gnu for the 3.3 branch, but a more experienced developer should decide where the best place is. Here is a reduced testcase: extern void abort (void); int main () { char buf[16] = "1234567890"; char *p = buf; *p++ = (char) __builtin_strlen (buf); if ((buf[0] != 10) || (p - buf != 1)) abort (); } And here is the patch: 2003-02-19 Glen Nakamura <glen@imodulo.com> * builtins.c (expand_builtin): Emit postincrements before expanding builtin functions. diff -Nru3p gcc-3.3.orig/gcc/builtins.c gcc-3.3/gcc/builtins.c --- gcc-3.3.orig/gcc/builtins.c 2002-12-01 17:51:43.000000000 +0000 +++ gcc-3.3/gcc/builtins.c 2002-12-01 17:51:43.000000000 +0000 @@ -3691,6 +3691,9 @@ expand_builtin (exp, target, subtarget, tree arglist = TREE_OPERAND (exp, 1); enum built_in_function fcode = DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (fndecl); + /* Perform postincrements before expanding builtin functions. */ + emit_queue (); + if (DECL_BUILT_IN_CLASS (fndecl) == BUILT_IN_MD) return (*targetm.expand_builtin) (exp, target, subtarget, mode, ignore);
next reply other threads:[~2003-02-19 9:16 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2003-02-19 9:16 Glen Nakamura [this message] -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2003-02-21 8:34 ebotcazou 2003-02-20 20:06 Eric Botcazou 2003-02-20 19:46 Glen Nakamura 2003-02-18 14:35 ebotcazou
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=20030219091601.6838.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=glen@imodulo.com \ --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=nobody@gcc.gnu.org \ /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: linkBe 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).