[Bug tree-optimization/105189] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code with -O1

2022-04-08 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105189 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5e6597064b0c7eb93b8f720afc4aa970eefb0628 commit r12-8056-g5e6597064b0c7eb93b8f720afc4aa970eefb0628 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/105189] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code with -O1

2022-04-07 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105189 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 52766 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52766=edit gcc12-pr105189.patch Untested fix.

[Bug tree-optimization/105189] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code with -O1

2022-04-07 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105189 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- I think the bug is in make_range_step. When we see (unsigned) foo () >= 0U, first make_range_step determines +[0U, -] range for (unsigned) foo (), that is correct (though equivalent to +[-, -] aka always

[Bug tree-optimization/105189] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code with -O1

2022-04-06 Thread davidfromonline at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105189 David Stone changed: What|Removed |Added CC||davidfromonline at gmail dot com ---

[Bug tree-optimization/105189] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code with -O1

2022-04-06 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105189 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Last