Folks. I have decided to put this aside until the next release. I
originally wanted a simple rename, and reimplementing things to align
with rtl, etc, is beyond what I want to tackle on this late.
I'll archive this away, and revisit it when we implement the
irange::known_ones mask.
Thanks for y
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 3:15 PM Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> The name nonzero_bits is confusing. We're not tracking nonzero bits.
> We're tracking known-zero bits, or at the worst we're tracking "maye
> nonzero bits". But really, the only thing we're sure about in the
> "nonzero" bi
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 06:54:32PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 06:51:19PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Agreed.
> >
> > I think maybe_nonzero_bits would be fine.
>
> Or yet another option is to change what we track and instead of
> having just one bitmask have 2 as tre
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 06:51:17PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 11:45:33AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 03:14:26PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > * asan.cc (handle_builtin_alloca): Rename *nonzero* to *known_zero*.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 06:51:19PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Agreed.
>
> I think maybe_nonzero_bits would be fine.
Or yet another option is to change what we track and instead of
having just one bitmask have 2 as tree-ssa-ccp.cc does,
one bitmask says which bits are known to be always the sam
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 11:45:33AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 03:14:26PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > The name nonzero_bits is confusing. We're not tracking nonzero bits.
> > We're tracking known-zero bits, or at the worst we're tracking "maye
Hi!
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 03:14:26PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The name nonzero_bits is confusing. We're not tracking nonzero bits.
> We're tracking known-zero bits, or at the worst we're tracking "maye
> nonzero bits". But really, the only thing we're sure about in the
>