On 6/10/25 13:52, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 10:51:25AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
Edge range should be fine, and really that assert doesnt really need to be
there.
Where the issue could arise is in gimple-range-fold.cc in
fold_using_range::range_of_range_op() where we see something like:
else if (is_a<gcond *> (s) && gimple_bb (s))
{
basic_block bb = gimple_bb (s);
edge e0 = EDGE_SUCC (bb, 0);
edge e1 = EDGE_SUCC (bb, 1);
if (!single_pred_p (e0->dest))
e0 = NULL;
if (!single_pred_p (e1->dest))
e1 = NULL;
src.register_outgoing_edges (as_a<gcond *> (s),
as_a <irange> (r), e0, e1);
Althogh, now that I look at it, it doesn't need much adjustment, just the
expectation that there are 2 edges. I suppose EDGE_SUCC (bb, 1) cpould
potentially trap if there is only one edge. we'd just have to guard it and
alloow for that case
So in that case
--- gcc/gimple-range-fold.cc.jj 2025-04-30 18:19:09.914047199 +0200
+++ gcc/gimple-range-fold.cc 2025-06-10 19:50:25.537598812 +0200
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.
#include "sreal.h"
#include "ipa-cp.h"
#include "ipa-prop.h"
+#include "rtl.h"
// Construct a fur_source, and set the m_query field.
fur_source::fur_source (range_query *q)
@@ -778,11 +779,12 @@ fold_using_range::range_of_range_op (vra
{
basic_block bb = gimple_bb (s);
edge e0 = EDGE_SUCC (bb, 0);
- edge e1 = EDGE_SUCC (bb, 1);
+ edge e1 = single_succ_p (bb) ? NULL : EDGE_SUCC (bb, 1);
+ gcc_checking_assert (e1 || currently_expanding_to_rtl);
if (!single_pred_p (e0->dest))
e0 = NULL;
- if (!single_pred_p (e1->dest))
+ if (e1 && !single_pred_p (e1->dest))
e1 = NULL;
src.register_outgoing_edges (as_a<gcond *> (s),
as_a <irange> (r), e0, e1);
--- gcc/gimple-range-path.cc.jj 2025-01-02 20:54:32.236128440 +0100
+++ gcc/gimple-range-path.cc 2025-06-10 19:50:36.188457163 +0200
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.
#include "ssa.h"
#include "tree-cfg.h"
#include "gimple-iterator.h"
+#include "rtl.h"
// Internal construct to help facilitate debugging of solver.
#define DEBUG_SOLVER (dump_file && (param_threader_debug ==
THREADER_DEBUG_ALL))
@@ -750,6 +751,11 @@ path_range_query::compute_outgoing_relat
{
if (gcond *cond = safe_dyn_cast <gcond *> (*gsi_last_bb (bb)))
{
+ if (single_succ_p (bb))
+ {
+ gcc_checking_assert (currently_expanding_to_rtl);
+ return;
+ }
int_range<2> r;
edge e0 = EDGE_SUCC (bb, 0);
edge e1 = EDGE_SUCC (bb, 1);
as incremental patch?
Jakub
Thats perfect, but you arent using the path ranger (thats just
threading),so that latter bit is not neceesary... it'll never trigger
where you are in expand.
