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

2014-06-26 Thread Eric Botcazou
> 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. Thank

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

2014-06-24 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 19:12:47, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Bernd Edlinger >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:40:53, Richard Biener wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Bernd

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

2014-06-23 Thread Bernd Edlinger
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.1

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

2014-06-23 Thread Bernd Edlinger
Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 19:12:47, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Bernd Edlinger > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:40:53, Richard Biener wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Bernd Edlinger >>> wrote: Hi, I noticed that several testc

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

2014-06-23 Thread Bernd Edlinger
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 mpn/

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

2014-06-23 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:40:53, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Bernd Edlinger >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I noticed that several testcases in the GMP-4.3.2 test suite are failing >>> now which >>> did not

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

2014-06-23 Thread Jeff Law
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 this.

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

2014-06-23 Thread Bernd Edlinger
Hi, On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:40:53, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, 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 >>

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

2014-06-23 Thread Eric Botcazou
> 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

2014-06-23 Thread Richard Biener
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, 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. > > mpn/get