Hi Andrew,
On 10/08/16 07:50, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:42 PM, kugan <kugan.vivekanandara...@linaro.org> wrote:
On 09/08/16 23:43, kugan wrote:
Hi,
The test-case in PR72835 is failing with -O2 and passing with
-fno-tree-reassoc. It also passes with -O2 -fno-tree-vrp.
diff of .115t.dse2 and .116t.reassoc1 for the c++ testcase is as
follows, which looks OK.
+ unsigned int _16;
+ unsigned int _17;
+ unsigned int _18;
<bb 2>:
_1 = s1.m2;
_2 = (unsigned int) _1;
_3 = s1.m3;
_4 = (unsigned int) _3;
- _5 = -_4;
- _6 = _2 * _5;
+ _5 = _4;
+ _6 = _5 * _2;
var_32.0_7 = var_32;
_8 = (unsigned int) var_32.0_7;
_9 = s1.m1;
_10 = (unsigned int) _9;
- _11 = -_10;
- _12 = _8 * _11;
- c_14 = _6 + _12;
+ _11 = _10;
+ _12 = _11 * _8;
+ _16 = _12 + _6;
+ _18 = _16;
+ _17 = -_18;
+ c_14 = _17;
if (c_14 != 4098873984)
However, I noticed that when we re-associate and assign different
operands to the stmts, we are not resetting the flow information to the
LHS. This looks wrong. Attached patch resets it. With this, the
testcases in TH PR is now working.
Bootstrap and regression testing for x86_64-linux-gnu is in progress. Is
this OK for trunk if there is no regression.
There was no new regression while testing. I also moved the testcase from
gcc.dg/torture/pr72835.c to gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr72835.c. Is this OK for trunk?
Why did you move the test-case from gcc.dg/torture to gcc.dg/tree-ssa?
I think most executable testcases (that was using standard options)
should be in tortue testcases to do a full sweep of the options.
I thought It was unnecessary to run with all the options as -O2 would
trigger this. I am OK with moving it to gcc.dg/torture/pr72835.c if you
prefer.
Thanks,
Kugan
