[Bug tree-optimization/92229] Optimization makes it impossible to read overflow flag

2019-11-24 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #5 from Ariel Torti --- (In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #4) > On Sat, 26 Oct 2019, arieltorti14 at gmail dot com wrote: > > You can write an asm to access a flag, it will just be whatever value the > flag has for whatever code

[Bug c/92230] Proposal to have builtin underflow detection function

2019-10-30 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92230 Ariel Torti changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/92229] Optimization makes it impossible to read overflow flag

2019-10-25 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92229 --- Comment #2 from Ariel Torti --- (In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #1) > Built-in functions related to integer overflow should be defined in terms > of the C abstract machine model, not in terms of processor flags. They

[Bug middle-end/92230] New: Proposal to have builtin underflow detection function

2019-10-25 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: arieltorti14 at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Right now GCC provides `__builtin_sub_overflow` to check for overflows during subtraction, but there's not way to check for underflow, other than maybe

[Bug tree-optimization/92229] New: Optimization makes it impossible to read overflow flag

2019-10-25 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: arieltorti14 at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- I'm implementing a builtin to read the overflow flag. It is meant to be used to simply the overflow checking code, instead of doing: ov

[Bug target/92137] [ia32] Missing documentation for ia32 builtins

2019-10-25 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92137 --- Comment #6 from Ariel Torti --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #5) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > > Those are intrinsics and most of them are documented in the Intel > > architecture manuals, or various web sites.

[Bug tree-optimization/92227] New: Optimizations on constant integer overflow checks lead to incorrect results

2019-10-25 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: arieltorti14 at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 47113 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47113=edit PoC generator W

[Bug target/92137] [ia32] Missing documentation for ia32 builtins

2019-10-17 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92137 --- Comment #2 from Ariel Torti --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > You shouldn't use those, they are for internal use only. That's the reason > they are not documented. Yes, my mistake. I just read

[Bug driver/92137] New: [ia32] Missing documentation for ia32 builtins

2019-10-17 Thread arieltorti14 at gmail dot com
: driver Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: arieltorti14 at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- There are many implemented x86 builtins that are not documented, namely: __builtin_ia32_bsrsi __builtin_ia32_bsrdi __builtin_ia32_rolqi __builtin_ia32_rolhi