https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115352
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Target|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
| |aarch64-linux-gnu
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2024-06-05
Host|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Reducing it down to `128*300` works but `128*400` fails. The gimple level
difference between 128*300 vs 128*400 is just the argument that gets passed.
So I don't think the bug is __builtin_sub_overflow_p expansion but I could be
wrong.
Note clang is very useless at testing this since it unrolls the loop always.
(that is after changing __builtin_sub_overflow_p to __builtin_sub_overflow:
_BitInt (65) t;
return __builtin_sub_overflow (0, b, &t);
)
It also fails on aarch64-linux-gnu.
