Hi!

The Knuth's division algorithm relies on the number of dividend limbs
to be greater ore equal to number of divisor limbs, which is why
I've added a special case for un < vn at the start of __divmodbitint4.
Unfortunately, my assumption that it then implies abs(v) > abs(u) and
so quotient must be 0 and remainder same as dividend is incorrect.
This is because this check is done before negation of the operands.
While bitint_reduce_prec reduces precision from clearly useless limbs,
the problematic case is when the dividend is unsigned or non-negative
and divisor is negative.  We can have limbs (from MS to LS):
dividend:       0       M       ?...
divisor:        -1      -N      ?...
where M has most significant bit set and M >= N (if M == N then it
also the following limbs matter) and the most significant limbs can
be even partial.  In this case, the quotient should be -1 rather than
0.  bitint_reduce_prec will reduce the precision of the dividend so
that M is the most significant limb, but can't reduce precision of the
divisor to more than having the -1 as most significant limb, because
-N doesn't have the most significant bit set.

The following patch fixes it by detecting this problematic case in the
un < vn handling, and instead of assuming q is 0 and r is u will
decrease vn by 1 because it knows the later code will negate the divisor
and it can be then expressed after negation in one fewer limbs.

Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?

2024-03-21  Jakub Jelinek  <ja...@redhat.com>

        PR libgcc/114397
        * libgcc2.c (__divmodbitint4): Don't assume un < vn always means
        abs(v) > abs(u), check for a special case of un + 1 == vn where
        u is non-negative and v negative and after v's negation vn could
        be reduced by 1.

        * gcc.dg/torture/bitint-65.c: New test.

--- libgcc/libgcc2.c.jj 2024-03-15 19:04:27.000000000 +0100
+++ libgcc/libgcc2.c    2024-03-20 18:23:51.956879521 +0100
@@ -1707,44 +1707,67 @@ __divmodbitint4 (UBILtype *q, SItype qpr
   USItype vp = avprec % W_TYPE_SIZE;
   if (__builtin_expect (un < vn, 0))
     {
-      /* If abs(v) > abs(u), then q is 0 and r is u.  */
-      if (q)
-       __builtin_memset (q, 0, qn * sizeof (UWtype));
-      if (r == NULL)
-       return;
-#if __LIBGCC_BITINT_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
-      r += rn - 1;
-      u += un - 1;
-#endif
-      if (up)
-       --un;
-      if (rn < un)
-       un = rn;
-      for (rn -= un; un; --un)
+      /* If abs(v) > abs(u), then q is 0 and r is u.
+        Unfortunately un < vn doesn't always mean abs(v) > abs(u).
+        If uprec > 0 and vprec < 0 and vn == un + 1, if the
+        top limb of v is all ones and the second most significant
+        limb has most significant bit clear, then just decrease
+        vn/avprec/vp and continue, after negation both numbers
+        will have the same number of limbs.  */
+      if (un + 1 == vn
+         && uprec >= 0
+         && vprec < 0
+         && ((v[BITINT_END (0, vn - 1)] | (vp ? ((UWtype) -1 << vp) : 0))
+             == (UWtype) -1)
+         && (Wtype) v[BITINT_END (1, vn - 2)] >= 0)
        {
-         *r = *u;
-         r += BITINT_INC;
-         u += BITINT_INC;
+         vp = 0;
+         --vn;
+#if __LIBGCC_BITINT_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
+         ++v;
+#endif
        }
-      if (!rn)
-       return;
-      if (up)
+      else
        {
-         if (uprec > 0)
-           *r = *u & (((UWtype) 1 << up) - 1);
-         else
-           *r = *u | ((UWtype) -1 << up);
-         r += BITINT_INC;
-         if (!--rn)
+         /* q is 0 and r is u.  */
+         if (q)
+           __builtin_memset (q, 0, qn * sizeof (UWtype));
+         if (r == NULL)
            return;
+#if __LIBGCC_BITINT_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
+         r += rn - 1;
+         u += un - 1;
+#endif
+         if (up)
+           --un;
+         if (rn < un)
+           un = rn;
+         for (rn -= un; un; --un)
+           {
+             *r = *u;
+             r += BITINT_INC;
+             u += BITINT_INC;
+           }
+         if (!rn)
+           return;
+         if (up)
+           {
+             if (uprec > 0)
+               *r = *u & (((UWtype) 1 << up) - 1);
+             else
+               *r = *u | ((UWtype) -1 << up);
+             r += BITINT_INC;
+             if (!--rn)
+               return;
+           }
+         UWtype c = uprec < 0 ? (UWtype) -1 : (UWtype) 0;
+         for (; rn; --rn)
+           {
+             *r = c;
+             r += BITINT_INC;
+           }
+         return;
        }
-      UWtype c = uprec < 0 ? (UWtype) -1 : (UWtype) 0;
-      for (; rn; --rn)
-       {
-         *r = c;
-         r += BITINT_INC;
-       }
-      return;
     }
   USItype qn2 = un - vn + 1;
   if (qn >= qn2)
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/bitint-65.c.jj 2024-03-20 18:41:38.026311007 
+0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/bitint-65.c    2024-03-20 18:40:18.604397871 
+0100
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+/* PR libgcc/114397 */
+/* { dg-do run { target bitint } } */
+/* { dg-options "-std=c23" } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! run_expensive_tests }  { "*" } { "-O0" "-O2" } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! run_expensive_tests } { "-flto" } { "" } } */
+
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 129
+int
+foo (unsigned _BitInt (128) a, _BitInt (129) b)
+{
+  return a / b;
+}
+#endif
+
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 192
+int
+bar (unsigned _BitInt (128) a, _BitInt (192) b)
+{
+  return a / b;
+}
+#endif
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 129
+  if (foo (336225022742818342628768636932743029911uwb,
+          -336225022742818342628768636932743029911wb) != -1
+      || foo (336225022742818342628768636932743029912uwb,
+             -336225022742818342628768636932743029911wb) != -1
+      || foo (336225022742818342628768636932743029911uwb,
+             -336225022742818342628768636932743029912wb) != 0)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+#endif
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 192
+  if (bar (336225022742818342628768636932743029911uwb,
+          -336225022742818342628768636932743029911wb) != -1
+      || bar (336225022742818342628768636932743029912uwb,
+             -336225022742818342628768636932743029911wb) != -1
+      || bar (336225022742818342628768636932743029911uwb,
+             -336225022742818342628768636932743029912wb) != 0)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+#endif
+}

        Jakub

Reply via email to