[Bug testsuite/82951] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040409-1.c undefined behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82951 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/82951] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040409-1.c undefined behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82951 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse --- Author: glisse Date: Mon Nov 20 13:26:39 2017 New Revision: 254954 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254954=gcc=rev Log: VRP: x+1 and -x cannot be INT_MIN 2017-11-20 Marc Glisse

[Bug testsuite/82951] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040409-1.c undefined behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82951 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Hmm, on RTL signs do not matter. I'd say strip the bogus cases from the > existing tests and "duplicate" them into new variants using -fwrapv? Thus > only apply

[Bug testsuite/82951] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040409-1.c undefined behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82951 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Hmm, on RTL signs do not matter. I'd say strip the bogus cases from the existing tests and "duplicate" them into new variants using -fwrapv? Thus only apply -fwrapv to those cases that need it.

[Bug testsuite/82951] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040409-1.c undefined behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82951 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- Or I should just add -fwrapv since those tests were added to test an RTL transformation ( https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-04/msg00615.html ).