I think it's fair to describe RTL's representation of condition flags
using MODE_CC as a little counter-intuitive. For example, the i386
backend represents the carry flag (in adc instructions) using RTL of
the form "(ltu:SI (reg:CCC) (const_int 0))", where great care needs
to be taken not to treat this like a normal RTX expression, after all
LTU (less-than-unsigned) against const0_rtx would normally always be
false. Hence, MODE_CC comparisons need to be treated with caution,
and simplify_const_relational_operation returns early (to avoid
problems) when GET_MODE_CLASS (GET_MODE (op0)) == MODE_CC.
However, consider the (currently) hypothetical situation, where the
RTL optimizers determine that a previous instruction unconditionally
sets or clears the carry flag, and this gets propagated by combine into
the above expression, we'd end up with something that looks like
(ltu:SI (const_int 1) (const_int 0)), which doesn't mean what it says.
Fortunately, simplify_const_relational_operation is passed the
original mode of the comparison (cmp_mode, the original mode of op0)
which can be checked for MODE_CC, even when op0 is now VOIDmode
(const_int) after the substitution. Defending against this is clearly the
right thing to do.
More controversially, rather than just abort simplification/optimization
in this case, we can use the comparison operator to infer/select the
semantics of the CC_MODE flag. Hopefully, whenever a backend uses LTU,
it represents the (set) carry flag (and behaves like i386.md), in which
case the result of the simplified expression is the first operand.
[If there's no standardization of semantics across backends, then
we should always just return 0; but then miss potential optimizations].
This patch has been tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with make bootstrap
and make -k check, both with and without --target_board=unix{-m32},
with no new failures, and in combination with a i386 backend patch
(that introduces support for x86's stc and clc instructions) where it
avoids failures. However, I'm submitting this middle-end piece
independently, to confirm that maintainers/reviewers are happy with
the approach, and also to check there are no issues on other platforms,
before building upon this infrastructure.
Thoughts? Ok for mainline?
2022-07-07 Roger Sayle <ro...@nextmovesoftware.com>
gcc/ChangeLog
* simplify-rtx.cc (simplify_const_relational_operation): Handle
case where both operands of a MODE_CC comparison have been
simplified to constant integers.
Thanks in advance,
Roger
--
diff --git a/gcc/simplify-rtx.cc b/gcc/simplify-rtx.cc
index fa20665..73ec5c7 100644
--- a/gcc/simplify-rtx.cc
+++ b/gcc/simplify-rtx.cc
@@ -6026,6 +6026,18 @@ simplify_const_relational_operation (enum rtx_code code,
return 0;
}
+ /* Handle MODE_CC comparisons that have been simplified to
+ constants. */
+ if (GET_MODE_CLASS (mode) == MODE_CC
+ && op1 == const0_rtx
+ && CONST_INT_P (op0))
+ {
+ /* LTU represents the carry flag. */
+ if (code == LTU)
+ return op0 == const0_rtx ? const0_rtx : const_true_rtx;
+ return 0;
+ }
+
/* We can't simplify MODE_CC values since we don't know what the
actual comparison is. */
if (GET_MODE_CLASS (GET_MODE (op0)) == MODE_CC)
