procyberian/gcc
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

lower-bitint: Fix up lower_addsub_overflow [PR112807]

Browse source 
lower_addsub_overflow uses handle_cast or handle_operand to extract current
limb from the operands.  Both of those functions heavily assume that they
return a large or huge BITINT_TYPE.  The problem in the testcase is that
this is violated.  Normally, lower_addsub_overflow isn't even called if
neither the return's type element type nor any of the operand is large/huge
BITINT_TYPE (on x86_64 129+ bits), for middle BITINT_TYPE (on x86_64 65-128
bits) some other code casts such operands to {,unsigned }__int128.
In the testcase the result is complex unsigned, so small, but one of the
arguments is _BitInt(256), so lower_addsub_overflow is called.  But
range_for_prec asks the ranger for ranges of the operands and in this
case the first argument has [0, 0xffffffff] range and second [-2, 1], so
unsigned 32-bit and signed 2-bit, and in such case the code for
handle_operand/handle_cast purposes would use the _BitInt(256) type for the
first operand (ok), but because prec3 aka maximum of result precision and
the VRP computes ranges of the arguments is 32, use cast to 32-bit
BITINT_TYPE, which is why it didn't work correctly.
The following patch ensures that in such cases we use handle_cast to the
type of the other argument.

Perhaps incrementally, we could try to optimize this in an earlier phase,
see that while the .{ADD,SUB}_OVERFLOW has large/huge _BitInt argument, as
ranger says it fits into a smaller type, add a cast of the larger argument
to the smaller precision type in which it fits.  Either in
gimple_lower_bitint, or match.pd.  An argument for the latter is that e.g.
complex unsigned .ADD_OVERFLOW (unsigned_long_long_arg, unsigned_arg)
where ranger says unsigned_long_long_arg fits into unsigned 32-bit could
be also more efficient as
.ADD_OVERFLOW ((unsigned) unsigned_long_long_arg, unsigned_arg)

2023-12-03  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

	PR middle-end/112807
	* gimple-lower-bitint.cc (bitint_large_huge::lower_addsub_overflow):
	When choosing type0 and type1 types, if prec3 has small/middle bitint
	kind, use maximum of type0 and type1's precision instead of prec3.

	* gcc.dg/bitint-46.c: New test.
This commit is contained in:
Jakub Jelinek 2023-12-03 17:54:03 +01:00
parent 8bc06e8302
commit eef6aea305
2 changed files with 39 additions and 4 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

11
gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc
View file

@ -3911,15 +3911,18 @@ bitint_large_huge::lower_addsub_overflow (tree obj, gimple *stmt)
tree type0 = TREE_TYPE (arg0);
tree type1 = TREE_TYPE (arg1);
if (TYPE_PRECISION (type0) < prec3)
int prec5 = prec3;
if (bitint_precision_kind (prec5) < bitint_prec_large)
prec5 = MAX (TYPE_PRECISION (type0), TYPE_PRECISION (type1));
if (TYPE_PRECISION (type0) < prec5)
{
type0 = build_bitint_type (prec3, TYPE_UNSIGNED (type0));
type0 = build_bitint_type (prec5, TYPE_UNSIGNED (type0));
if (TREE_CODE (arg0) == INTEGER_CST)
arg0 = fold_convert (type0, arg0);
}
if (TYPE_PRECISION (type1) < prec3)
if (TYPE_PRECISION (type1) < prec5)
{
type1 = build_bitint_type (prec3, TYPE_UNSIGNED (type1));
type1 = build_bitint_type (prec5, TYPE_UNSIGNED (type1));
if (TREE_CODE (arg1) == INTEGER_CST)
arg1 = fold_convert (type1, arg1);
}

32
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitint-46.c Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
/* PR middle-end/112807 */
/* { dg-do compile { target bitint } } */
/* { dg-options "-std=gnu23 -O2" } */
#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 256
__attribute__((noipa)) int
foo (_BitInt (256) a, _BitInt (2) b)
{
if (a < 0 || a > ~0U)
return -1;
return __builtin_sub_overflow_p (a, b, 0);
}
#endif
int
main ()
{
#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 256
if (foo (-5wb, 1wb) != -1
|| foo (1 + (_BitInt (256)) ~0U, -2) != -1
|| foo (0, 0) != 0
|| foo (0, 1) != 0
|| foo (0, -1) != 0
|| foo (~0U, 0) != 1
|| foo (__INT_MAX__, 0) != 0
|| foo (__INT_MAX__, -1) != 1
|| foo (1 + (_BitInt (256)) __INT_MAX__, 0) != 1
|| foo (1 + (_BitInt (256)) __INT_MAX__, 1) != 0
|| foo (1 + (_BitInt (256)) __INT_MAX__, -2) != 1)
__builtin_abort ();
#endif
}