On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 11:12:11AM -0500, Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches wrote:
> In GCC13, I don't think there are any uses of the relation oracle outside of
> ranger and range-ops.
>
> So, given that, perhaps the simplest thing to do is bail on all this change,
> and instead simply do the following which also fixes the PR. (im running it
> thru tests as we speak)
>
>
>
> diff --git a/gcc/gimple-range-fold.cc b/gcc/gimple-range-fold.cc
> index 91eb6298254..9c5359a3fc6 100644
> --- a/gcc/gimple-range-fold.cc
> +++ b/gcc/gimple-range-fold.cc
> @@ -1039,6 +1039,9 @@ fold_using_range::relation_fold_and_or (irange&
> lhs_range, gimple *s,
> if (!ssa1_dep1 || !ssa1_dep2 || !ssa2_dep1 || !ssa2_dep2)
> return;
>
> + if (HONOR_NANS (TREE_TYPE (ssa1_dep1)))
> + return;
> +
> // Make sure they are the same dependencies, and detect the order of the
> // relationship.
> bool reverse_op2 = true;
>
>
If this works, maybe (does something check if ssa1_dep1 has certain
type (I assume ssa1_dep2 has to have the same) then ssa2_dep{1,2} has that
type too (or uselessly equal to that)? Though, if this spot has both
operands of the comparison, could we for HONOR_NANS case ask frange if
any of them is maybe_nan or known_nan and punt only if anything can be NAN?
Jakub
