diff mbox

Fix SSA_NAME range info ICE (PR tree-optimization/64494)

Message ID 20150105170141.GU1667@tucnak.redhat.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Jakub Jelinek Jan. 5, 2015, 5:01 p.m. UTC 
Hi!

The SSA_NAME range info consists of two fields, SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO pointer
and SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P flag, but the recently added clearing of range
info cleared just SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO, leading to ICE on the following
testcase where we asserted that SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P flag is cleared
on a SSA_NAME that doesn't have SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO non-NULL.

Fixed thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for
trunk?

2015-01-05  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

	PR tree-optimization/64494
	* tree-ssa-loop-im.c (move_computations_dom_walker::before_dom): Also
	clear SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P flag.

	* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr64494.c: New test.


	Jakub

Comments

Richard Biener Jan. 5, 2015, 6:39 p.m. UTC | #1 
On January 5, 2015 6:01:41 PM CET, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>The SSA_NAME range info consists of two fields, SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO
>pointer
>and SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P flag, but the recently added clearing of
>range
>info cleared just SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO, leading to ICE on the following
>testcase where we asserted that SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P flag is cleared
>on a SSA_NAME that doesn't have SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO non-NULL.
>
>Fixed thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok
>for
>trunk?

OK.

Thanks
Richard.

>2015-01-05  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>
>
>	PR tree-optimization/64494
>	* tree-ssa-loop-im.c (move_computations_dom_walker::before_dom): Also
>	clear SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P flag.
>
>	* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr64494.c: New test.
>
>--- gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c.jj	2014-12-10 20:57:54.000000000 +0100
>+++ gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c	2015-01-05 10:34:26.294637773 +0100
>@@ -1236,7 +1236,11 @@ move_computations_dom_walker::before_dom
> 	  && (!ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb)
> 	      || (ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb) != level
> 		  && !flow_loop_nested_p (ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb), level))))
>-	SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (gimple_assign_lhs (new_stmt)) = NULL;
>+	{
>+	  tree lhs = gimple_assign_lhs (new_stmt);
>+	  SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (lhs) = NULL;
>+	  SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P (lhs) = 0;
>+	}
>       gsi_insert_on_edge (loop_preheader_edge (level), new_stmt);
>       remove_phi_node (&bsi, false);
>     }
>@@ -1302,7 +1306,11 @@ move_computations_dom_walker::before_dom
> 	  && (!ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb)
> 	      || !(ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb) == level
> 		   || flow_loop_nested_p (ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb), level))))
>-	SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (gimple_get_lhs (stmt)) = NULL;
>+	{
>+	  tree lhs = gimple_get_lhs (stmt);
>+	  SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (lhs) = NULL;
>+	  SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P (lhs) = 0;
>+	}
>       /* In case this is a stmt that is not unconditionally executed
>          when the target loop header is executed and the stmt may
> 	 invoke undefined integer or pointer overflow rewrite it to
>--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr64494.c.jj	2015-01-05
>10:38:11.766781507 +0100
>+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr64494.c	2015-01-05
>10:37:58.000000000 +0100
>@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
>+/* PR tree-optimization/64494 */
>+
>+int a, b;
>+unsigned char c;
>+
>+int
>+main ()
>+{
>+  int d;
>+  a = 0;
>+  for (d = 0; d < 2; d++)
>+    {
>+      a &= (b >= 1);
>+      c = (204 > (((unsigned char) ~0) >> a)) ? 0 : 204 << a;
>+      b = 0;
>+    }
>+  return 0;
>+}
>
>	Jakub
diff mbox

Patch

--- gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c.jj	2014-12-10 20:57:54.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c	2015-01-05 10:34:26.294637773 +0100
@@ -1236,7 +1236,11 @@  move_computations_dom_walker::before_dom
 	  && (!ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb)
 	      || (ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb) != level
 		  && !flow_loop_nested_p (ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb), level))))
-	SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (gimple_assign_lhs (new_stmt)) = NULL;
+	{
+	  tree lhs = gimple_assign_lhs (new_stmt);
+	  SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (lhs) = NULL;
+	  SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P (lhs) = 0;
+	}
       gsi_insert_on_edge (loop_preheader_edge (level), new_stmt);
       remove_phi_node (&bsi, false);
     }
@@ -1302,7 +1306,11 @@  move_computations_dom_walker::before_dom
 	  && (!ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb)
 	      || !(ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb) == level
 		   || flow_loop_nested_p (ALWAYS_EXECUTED_IN (bb), level))))
-	SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (gimple_get_lhs (stmt)) = NULL;
+	{
+	  tree lhs = gimple_get_lhs (stmt);
+	  SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (lhs) = NULL;
+	  SSA_NAME_ANTI_RANGE_P (lhs) = 0;
+	}
       /* In case this is a stmt that is not unconditionally executed
          when the target loop header is executed and the stmt may
 	 invoke undefined integer or pointer overflow rewrite it to
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr64494.c.jj	2015-01-05 10:38:11.766781507 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr64494.c	2015-01-05 10:37:58.000000000 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ 
+/* PR tree-optimization/64494 */
+
+int a, b;
+unsigned char c;
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+  int d;
+  a = 0;
+  for (d = 0; d < 2; d++)
+    {
+      a &= (b >= 1);
+      c = (204 > (((unsigned char) ~0) >> a)) ? 0 : 204 << a;
+      b = 0;
+    }
+  return 0;
+}