Hi!

Related to the previously posted patch, I've noticed that
on the attached testcase we don't optimize the strlen into
constant, even when we easily could.

Implemented thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux,
ok for trunk?

2013-05-10  Jakub Jelinek  <ja...@redhat.com>

        PR tree-optimization/57230
        * tree-ssa-strlen.c (handle_char_store): Record length for
        array store from STRING_CST.

        * gcc.dg/strlenopt-24.c: New test.

--- gcc/tree-ssa-strlen.c.jj    2013-05-10 08:57:20.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-strlen.c       2013-05-10 10:22:03.166458997 +0200
@@ -1740,6 +1740,25 @@ handle_char_store (gimple_stmt_iterator
       if (si != NULL)
        si->writable = true;
     }
+  else if (idx == 0
+          && TREE_CODE (gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt)) == STRING_CST
+          && ssaname == NULL_TREE
+          && TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (lhs)) == ARRAY_TYPE)
+    {
+      size_t l = strlen (TREE_STRING_POINTER (gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt)));
+      HOST_WIDE_INT a = int_size_in_bytes (TREE_TYPE (lhs));
+      if (a > 0 && (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT) a > l)
+       {
+         int idx = new_addr_stridx (lhs);
+         if (idx != 0)
+           {
+             si = new_strinfo (build_fold_addr_expr (lhs), idx,
+                               build_int_cst (size_type_node, l));
+             set_strinfo (idx, si);
+             si->dont_invalidate = true;
+           }
+       }
+    }
 
   if (si != NULL && initializer_zerop (gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt)))
     {
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/strlenopt-24.c.jj      2013-05-10 10:30:01.343821849 
+0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/strlenopt-24.c 2013-05-10 10:30:37.736621582 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+/* PR tree-optimization/57230 */
+/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-strlen" } */
+
+#include "strlenopt.h"
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+  char p[] = "hello world";
+  if (strlen (p) != 11)
+    abort ();
+  return 0;
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "strlen \\(" 0 "strlen" } } *
+/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "strlen" } } */

        Jakub

Reply via email to