[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor --- ...and marking it as such.
[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor --- Fixed. Thanks for reporting.
[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Martin Jambor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:127bf4228d0cb21f28fd5ed4dd820fa4760fc771 commit r10-8264-g127bf4228d0cb21f28fd5ed4dd820fa4760fc771 Author: Martin Jambor Date: Mon Jun 8 20:15:22 2020 +0200 ipa-sra: Do not remove statements necessary because of non-call EH (PR 95113) PR 95113 revealed that when reasoning about which parameters are dead, IPA-SRA does not perform the same check related to non-call exceptions as tree DCE. It most certainly should and so this patch moves the condition used in tree-ssa-dce.c into a separate predicate (in tree-eh.c) and uses it from both places. gcc/ChangeLog: 2020-05-27 Martin Jambor PR ipa/95113 * tree-ssa-dce.c (mark_stmt_if_obviously_necessary): Move non-call exceptions check to... * tree-eh.c (stmt_unremovable_because_of_non_call_eh_p): ...this new function. * tree-eh.h (stmt_unremovable_because_of_non_call_eh_p): Declare it. * ipa-sra.c (isra_track_scalar_value_uses): Use it. New parameter fun. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2020-05-27 Martin Jambor PR ipa/95113 * gcc.dg/ipa/pr95113.c: New test. (cherry picked from commit 1980ffec48c6fa41396bea66366f2e591798e1e1)
[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1980ffec48c6fa41396bea66366f2e591798e1e1 commit r11-935-g1980ffec48c6fa41396bea66366f2e591798e1e1 Author: Martin Jambor Date: Thu Jun 4 17:03:27 2020 +0200 ipa-sra: Do not remove statements necessary because of non-call EH (PR 95113) PR 95113 revealed that when reasoning about which parameters are dead, IPA-SRA does not perform the same check related to non-call exceptions as tree DCE. It most certainly should and so this patch moves the condition used in tree-ssa-dce.c into a separate predicate (in tree-eh.c) and uses it from both places. gcc/ChangeLog: 2020-05-27 Martin Jambor PR ipa/95113 * tree-ssa-dce.c (mark_stmt_if_obviously_necessary): Move non-call exceptions check to... * tree-eh.c (stmt_unremovable_because_of_non_call_eh_p): ...this new function. * tree-eh.h (stmt_unremovable_because_of_non_call_eh_p): Declare it. * ipa-sra.c (isra_track_scalar_value_uses): Use it. New parameter fun. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2020-05-27 Martin Jambor PR ipa/95113 * gcc.dg/ipa/pr95113.c: New test.
[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #3) > > Indeed, -fno-ipa-sra fixes it. So, a duplicate of PR93385? Similar, but not quite the same. I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-May/546703.html
[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||93385 Priority|P3 |P2 Referenced Bugs: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385 [Bug 93385] [10/11 Regression] wrong code with u128 modulo at -O2 -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce
[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113 --- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Guess dup of the other PR where the IPA opts assume DCE which doesn't really > happen (the *p load result is never used). Indeed, -fno-ipa-sra fixes it. So, a duplicate of PR93385?
[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
int a, b;
static inline long int
foo (long int x, int y)
{
if (y == 0)
return 0;
if (x == -1 && y == -1)
return 0;
return x / y;
}
static inline int
bar (int *p)
{
int c = foo (a, 1) + *p;
return b;
}
int
main ()
{
int d = 0;
b = foo (1, 1);
bar ();
return 0;
}
Guess dup of the other PR where the IPA opts assume DCE which doesn't really
happen (the *p load result is never used).
[Bug tree-optimization/95113] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-05-13 CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Target Milestone|--- |10.2 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Started with r10-3542-g0b92cf305dcf34387a8e2564e55ca8948df3b47a
