On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 08:25:49PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> So why not always return an unsigned type then by telling type_for_size?
So like this (if it passes bootstrap/regtest)?
2019-09-01 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
PR go/91617
* fold-const.c (range_check_type): For enumeral and boolean
type, pass 1 to type_for_size langhook instead of
TYPE_UNSIGNED (etype). Return unsigned_type_for result whenever
etype isn't TYPE_UNSIGNED INTEGER_TYPE.
(build_range_check): Don't call unsigned_type_for for pointer types.
* match.pd (X / C1 op C2): Don't call unsigned_type_for on
range_check_type result.
--- gcc/fold-const.c.jj 2019-08-27 12:26:39.303884758 +0200
+++ gcc/fold-const.c 2019-09-01 18:22:41.866023675 +0200
@@ -4938,10 +4938,9 @@ range_check_type (tree etype)
/* First make sure that arithmetics in this type is valid, then make sure
that it wraps around. */
if (TREE_CODE (etype) == ENUMERAL_TYPE || TREE_CODE (etype) == BOOLEAN_TYPE)
- etype = lang_hooks.types.type_for_size (TYPE_PRECISION (etype),
- TYPE_UNSIGNED (etype));
+ etype = lang_hooks.types.type_for_size (TYPE_PRECISION (etype), 1);
- if (TREE_CODE (etype) == INTEGER_TYPE && !TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS (etype))
+ if (TREE_CODE (etype) != INTEGER_TYPE || !TYPE_UNSIGNED (etype))
{
tree utype, minv, maxv;
@@ -5049,9 +5048,6 @@ build_range_check (location_t loc, tree
if (etype == NULL_TREE)
return NULL_TREE;
- if (POINTER_TYPE_P (etype))
- etype = unsigned_type_for (etype);
-
high = fold_convert_loc (loc, etype, high);
low = fold_convert_loc (loc, etype, low);
exp = fold_convert_loc (loc, etype, exp);
--- gcc/match.pd.jj 2019-08-27 12:26:40.745863588 +0200
+++ gcc/match.pd 2019-09-01 18:23:02.098729356 +0200
@@ -1569,8 +1569,6 @@ (define_operator_list COND_TERNARY
tree etype = range_check_type (TREE_TYPE (@0));
if (etype)
{
- if (! TYPE_UNSIGNED (etype))
- etype = unsigned_type_for (etype);
hi = fold_convert (etype, hi);
lo = fold_convert (etype, lo);
hi = const_binop (MINUS_EXPR, etype, hi, lo);
Jakub
