https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122103
Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2025-10-01
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC| |tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Started with
g:5596572b6bf72031de888301ebfe8e984df04dc9 is the first bad commit
commit 5596572b6bf72031de888301ebfe8e984df04dc9
Author: Andrew Pinski <[email protected]>
Date: Sat Oct 26 02:14:18 2024 -0700
tree: Mark PAREN_EXPR and VEC_DUPLICATE_EXPR as non-trapping [PR117234]
While looking to fix a possible trapping issue in PHI-OPT's factor,
I noticed that some tree codes could be marked as trapping even
though they don't have a possibility to trap. In the case of PAREN_EXPR,
it is basically a nop except when it comes to association across it so
it can't trap.
In the case of VEC_DUPLICATE_EXPR, it is similar to a CONSTRUCTOR, so it
can't trap.
This fixes those 2 issues and adds 4 testcases, 2 which are specific to
aarch64
since the only way to get a VEC_DUPLICATE_EXPR is to use intrinsics
currently.
Note that __builtin_sqrt is correctly marked as trapping. So this doesn't
vectorize.
void f (float *c, int n)
{
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
c[i] = __builtin_sqrt (c[i]);
}
unless at -Ofast.
clearly something is confusing gimple_could_trap_p as it didn't mask the
operation.
