On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 02:00:56PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > --- gcc/tree-vrp.c
> > +++ gcc/tree-vrp.c
> > @@ -6051,10 +6051,17 @@ find_switch_asserts (basic_block bb, gswitch *last)
> > /* Now register along the default label assertions that correspond to the
> > anti-range of each label. */
> > int insertion_limit = PARAM_VALUE (PARAM_MAX_VRP_SWITCH_ASSERTIONS);
> > + if (insertion_limit == 0)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + /* We can't do this if the default case shares a label with another
> > case. */
> > + tree default_cl = gimple_switch_default_label (last);
> > for (idx = 1; idx < n; idx++)
> > {
> > tree min, max;
> > tree cl = gimple_switch_label (last, idx);
> > + if (CASE_LABEL (cl) == CASE_LABEL (default_cl))
> > + break;
>
> It's conservative to break here but don't you actually want to continue
> instead?
Right, that should be safe and generate better range info for the default
label.
> > min = CASE_LOW (cl);
> > max = CASE_HIGH (cl);
> > @@ -6065,6 +6072,8 @@ find_switch_asserts (basic_block bb, gswitch *last)
> > {
> > tree next_min, next_max;
> > tree next_cl = gimple_switch_label (last, idx);
> > + if (CASE_LABEL (next_cl) == CASE_LABEL (default_cl))
> > + break;
>
> here the break is of course correct.
>
> Ok with that change.
Thanks,
Marek
