Re: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

Only if we could somehow rule out that chars_per_limb can be zero. Then we know for sure that unsigned overflow must happen, and the only possible result would be -1. But at this time, both -1 and 4294967295 are possible. I see, I thought you meant that the result was -1 statically. Thanks

Re: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote: Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 19:12:47, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote: Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:40:53, Richard Biener wrote: On Sun, Jun

Re: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote: Hi, I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are failing now which did not happen with GCC 4.9.0. I debugged the first one, mpz/convert, and found the file mpn/generic/get_str.c was

Re: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are failing now which did not happen with GCC 4.9.0. I debugged the first one, mpz/convert, and found the file mpn/generic/get_str.c was miscompiled. mpn/get_str.c.132t.dse2: pretmp_183 = (sizetype) chars_per_limb_80;

RE: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:40:53, Richard Biener wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote: Hi, I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are failing now which did not happen with GCC 4.9.0. I debugged the first one,

Re: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

On 06/22/14 01:14, Bernd Edlinger wrote: Hi, I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are failing now which did not happen with GCC 4.9.0. I debugged the first one, mpz/convert, and found the file mpn/generic/get_str.c was miscompiled. It's interesting you stumbled on

Re: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote: Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:40:53, Richard Biener wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote: Hi, I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are

RE: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:27:59, Jeff Law wrote: On 06/22/14 01:14, Bernd Edlinger wrote: Hi, I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are failing now which did not happen with GCC 4.9.0. I debugged the first one, mpz/convert, and found the file

RE: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 19:12:47, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote: Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:40:53, Richard Biener wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote: Hi, I

RE: [PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 16:22:13, Eric Botcazou wrote: I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are failing now which did not happen with GCC 4.9.0. I debugged the first one, mpz/convert, and found the file mpn/generic/get_str.c was miscompiled. mpn/get_str.c.132t.dse2:

[PATCH] Fix forwporp pattern (T)(P + A) - (T)P - (T)A

Hi, I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are failing now which did not happen with GCC 4.9.0.  I debugged the first one, mpz/convert, and found the file mpn/generic/get_str.c was miscompiled. mpn/get_str.c.132t.dse2:   pretmp_183 = (sizetype) chars_per_limb_80;