Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 11:09 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > I have now applied this variant. > > You backported it onto the 8 branch on Friday: > > 2019-05-03 Richard Biener > > Backport from mainline > [...] > 2019-03-07 Richard Biener > > PR tree-optimization/89595

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

> I have now applied this variant. You backported it onto the 8 branch on Friday: 2019-05-03 Richard Biener Backport from mainline [...] 2019-03-07 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/89595 * tree-ssa-dom.c (dom_opt_dom_walker::optimize_stmt): Take

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 8:53 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > On 3/6/19 3:05 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:36 PM Jeff Law wrote: > >> > >> On 3/5/19 7:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > >> > >>> So fixing it properly with also re-optimize_stmt those stmts so we'd CSE > >>> the

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On 3/6/19 3:05 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:36 PM Jeff Law wrote: >> >> On 3/5/19 7:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >>> So fixing it properly with also re-optimize_stmt those stmts so we'd CSE >>> the MAX_EXPR introduced by folding makes it somewhat ugly. >>> >>>

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 11:05 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:36 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > On 3/5/19 7:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > So fixing it properly with also re-optimize_stmt those stmts so we'd CSE > > > the MAX_EXPR introduced by folding makes it somewhat

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:36 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > On 3/5/19 7:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > So fixing it properly with also re-optimize_stmt those stmts so we'd CSE > > the MAX_EXPR introduced by folding makes it somewhat ugly. > > > > Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On 3/5/19 7:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > So fixing it properly with also re-optimize_stmt those stmts so we'd CSE > the MAX_EXPR introduced by folding makes it somewhat ugly. > > Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress. > > Any ideas how to make it less so? I can split

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On 3/4/19 4:45 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 10:02 PM Qing Zhao wrote: >> >> >> On Mar 1, 2019, at 1:25 PM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >> >> On March 1, 2019 6:49:20 PM GMT+01:00, Qing Zhao >> wrote: >> >> Jeff, >> >> thanks a lot for the reply. >> >> this is really

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On 3/1/19 10:49 AM, Qing Zhao wrote: > Jeff, > > thanks a lot for the reply. > > this is really helpful. > > I double checked the dumped intermediate file for pass “dom3", and > located the following for _152: > > BEFORE the pass “dom3”, there is no _152, the corresponding Block > looks

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

> On Mar 5, 2019, at 8:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > will you commit this fix to gcc9 and gcc8 (we need it in gcc8)? >>> >>> I'll see to carve out some cycles trying to find a testcase and amend >>> the fix a bit >>> and will take care of testing/submitting the fix. Thanks

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

> On Mar 5, 2019, at 4:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > >>> >>> will you commit this fix to gcc9 and gcc8 (we need it in gcc8)? >> >> I'll see to carve out some cycles trying to find a testcase and amend >> the fix a bit >> and will take care of testing/submitting the fix. Thanks for testing

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 11:44 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:48 AM Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 11:01 PM Qing Zhao wrote: > > > > > > Hi, Richard, > > > > > > > On Mar 4, 2019, at 5:45 AM, Richard Biener > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> It

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:48 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 11:01 PM Qing Zhao wrote: > > > > Hi, Richard, > > > > > On Mar 4, 2019, at 5:45 AM, Richard Biener > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> It looks like DOM fails to visit stmts generated by simplification. Can > > >> you

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 11:01 PM Qing Zhao wrote: > > Hi, Richard, > > > On Mar 4, 2019, at 5:45 AM, Richard Biener > > wrote: > >> > >> It looks like DOM fails to visit stmts generated by simplification. Can > >> you open a bug report with a testcase? > >> > >> > >> The problem is, It took me

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

Hi, Richard, > On Mar 4, 2019, at 5:45 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> It looks like DOM fails to visit stmts generated by simplification. Can you >> open a bug report with a testcase? >> >> >> The problem is, It took me quite some time in order to come up with a small >> and independent

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

Richard, thanks a lot for your suggested fix. I will try it. Qing > On Mar 4, 2019, at 5:45 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 10:02 PM Qing Zhao wrote: >> >> >> On Mar 1, 2019, at 1:25 PM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >> >> On March 1, 2019 6:49:20 PM GMT+01:00, Qing

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 10:02 PM Qing Zhao wrote: > > > On Mar 1, 2019, at 1:25 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On March 1, 2019 6:49:20 PM GMT+01:00, Qing Zhao wrote: > > Jeff, > > thanks a lot for the reply. > > this is really helpful. > > I double checked the dumped intermediate file for pass

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

> On Mar 1, 2019, at 1:25 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On March 1, 2019 6:49:20 PM GMT+01:00, Qing Zhao > wrote: >> Jeff, >> >> thanks a lot for the reply. >> >> this is really helpful. >> >> I double checked the dumped intermediate file for pass “dom3", and

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On March 1, 2019 6:49:20 PM GMT+01:00, Qing Zhao wrote: >Jeff, > >thanks a lot for the reply. > >this is really helpful. > >I double checked the dumped intermediate file for pass “dom3", and >located the following for _152: > >BEFORE the pass “dom3”, there is no _152, the corresponding Block

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

Jeff, thanks a lot for the reply. this is really helpful. I double checked the dumped intermediate file for pass “dom3", and located the following for _152: BEFORE the pass “dom3”, there is no _152, the corresponding Block looks like: [local count: 12992277]: _98 = (int)

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

On 2/28/19 10:05 AM, Qing Zhao wrote: > Hi, > > I have been debugging a runtime error caused by value range propagation. and > finally located to the following gcc routine: > > vrp_meet_1 in gcc/tree-vrp.c > > > /* Meet operation for value ranges. Given two value ranges VR0 and >VR1,

A bug in vrp_meet?

Hi, I have been debugging a runtime error caused by value range propagation. and finally located to the following gcc routine: vrp_meet_1 in gcc/tree-vrp.c /* Meet operation for value ranges. Given two value ranges VR0 and VR1, store in VR0 a range that contains both VR0 and VR1.