https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115352
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I've first tried
--- gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc.jj 2024-04-12 10:59:48.233153262 +0200
+++ gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc 2024-06-06 11:05:29.845597763 +0200
@@ -4324,7 +4324,8 @@ bitint_large_huge::lower_addsub_overflow
else
g = gimple_build_assign (this_ovf, NE_EXPR, l, cmp);
insert_before (g);
- if (cmp_code == GT_EXPR)
+ if (cmp_code == GT_EXPR
+ || (cmp_code == GE_EXPR && single_comparison))
{
tree t = make_ssa_name (boolean_type_node);
g = gimple_build_assign (t, BIT_IOR_EXPR, ovf, this_ovf);
which fixes the #c0 testcase. But on the reduced
int
foo (_BitInt (385) b)
{
return __builtin_sub_overflow_p (0, b, (_BitInt (65)) 0);
}
int
main ()
{
if (!foo (-(_BitInt (385))
0x00000000000000000c377e8a3fd1881fff035bb487a51c9ed1f7350befa7ec4450000000000000000a3cf8d1ebb723981wb))
__builtin_abort ();
if (!foo
(-0x1ffffffffffffffffc377e8a3fd1881fff035bb487a51c9ed1f7350befa7ec445ffffffffffffffffa3cf8d1ebb723981uwb))
__builtin_abort ();
if (!foo (-(_BitInt (385))
0x00000000000000000ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff00000000000000000000000000000000a3cf8d1ebb723981wb))
__builtin_abort ();
if (!foo
(-0x1ffffffffffffffff00000000000000000000000000000000ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffa3cf8d1ebb723981uwb))
__builtin_abort ();
}
testcase it only fixes the first 2 calls but not the last 2.
So, I'm afraid I just need to kill the optimization instead:
--- gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc.jj 2024-04-12 10:59:48.233153262 +0200
+++ gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc 2024-06-06 12:06:57.065717651 +0200
@@ -4286,11 +4286,7 @@ bitint_large_huge::lower_addsub_overflow
bool single_comparison
= (startlimb + 2 >= fin || (startlimb & 1) != (i & 1));
if (!single_comparison)
- {
- cmp_code = GE_EXPR;
- if (!check_zero && (start % limb_prec) == 0)
- single_comparison = true;
- }
+ cmp_code = GE_EXPR;
else if ((startlimb & 1) == (i & 1))
cmp_code = EQ_EXPR;
else
The idea behind the optimization was that arith_overflow_extract_bits in those
cases is the same, we just extract all bits from the limb, whether it is the
limb at the boundary (i.e. EQ_EXPR to the compared limb index) or above
(GT_EXPR), so GE_EXPR would do. Except without the first patch it completely
ignored the previously accumulated mismatches (i.e. overflows) from lower
limbs, and while that no longer is the case with the first patch, it still
ignores whether the upper bits were all 0s or all 1s previously and as long as
they are again all 0s or all 1s, it happily makes it non-overflow case and what
the next limb should compare against.
