From: Paweł Sikora <pluto@pld-linux.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:39:26 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: - fix ada fixed point wrong code.
X-Git-Tag: auto/th/gcc-4_1_0-0_20050701T1908UTC_2~18
X-Git-Url: http://git.pld-linux.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=25f6bdc3f1effe689c767f5ce0e0a8bf0d325c14;p=packages%2Fgcc.git

- fix ada fixed point wrong code.

Changed files:
    gcc-pr22026.patch -> 1.1
---

diff --git a/gcc-pr22026.patch b/gcc-pr22026.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c85cd03
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc-pr22026.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 07:39:44 -0700
+From: Kazu Hirata <kazu at sethra dot codesourcery dot com>
+Subject: [patch] tree-vrp.c: Avoid VR_ANTI_RANGE in certain binary expression. (Take 2)
+
+Hi,
+
+Attached is a revised version of the patch posted at
+
+http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-06/msg01729.html
+
+This version tries a bit harder not to drop to VR_VARYING right away
+when a binary expression involves VR_ANTI_RANGE.  Specifically, We
+drop to VR_VARYING only if a binary expression involving VR_ANTI_RANGE
+is PLUS_EXPR, MINUS_EXPR, or unsigned MULT_EXPR.  Other cases are left
+intact.
+
+The testcase has been updated to cover MINUS_EXPR and unsigned
+MULT_EXPR as well as PLUS_EXPR, which was already in the previous
+version of the testcase.
+
+Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.  OK to apply?
+
+Kazu Hirata
+
+2005-06-23  Kazu Hirata  <kazu@codesourcery.com>
+
+	PR tree-optimization/22026
+	* tree-vrp.c (extract_range_from_binary_expr): Drop to
+	VR_VARYING if a binary expression involving VR_ANTI_RANGE is
+	PLUS_EXPR, MINUS_EXPR, or unsigned MULT_EXPR.
+
+2005-06-23  Kazu Hirata  <kazu@codesourcery.com>
+
+	PR tree-optimization/22026
+	* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr22026.c: New.
+
+--- a/gcc/tree-vrp.c	21 Jun 2005 18:46:19 -0000	2.32
++++ b/gcc/tree-vrp.c	22 Jun 2005 20:33:01 -0000
+@@ -1100,6 +1100,19 @@ extract_range_from_binary_expr (value_ra
+ 	   || code == MIN_EXPR
+ 	   || code == MAX_EXPR)
+     {
++      /* If we have a PLUS_EXPR with two VR_ANTI_RANGEs, drop to
++	 VR_VARYING.  It would take more effort to compute a precise
++	 range for such a case.  For example, if we have op0 == 1 and
++	 op1 == -1 with their ranges both being ~[0,0], we would have
++	 op0 + op1 == 0, so we cannot claim that the sum is in ~[0,0].
++	 Note that we are guaranteed to have vr0.type == vr1.type at
++	 this point.  */
++      if (code == PLUS_EXPR && vr0.type == VR_ANTI_RANGE)
++	{
++	  set_value_range_to_varying (vr);
++	  return;
++	}
++
+       /* For operations that make the resulting range directly
+ 	 proportional to the original ranges, apply the operation to
+ 	 the same end of each range.  */
+@@ -1116,6 +1129,22 @@ extract_range_from_binary_expr (value_ra
+       tree val[4];
+       size_t i;
+ 
++      /* If we have an unsigned MULT_EXPR with two VR_ANTI_RANGEs,
++	 drop to VR_VARYING.  It would take more effort to compute a
++	 precise range for such a case.  For example, if we have
++	 op0 == 65536 and op1 == 65536 with their ranges both being
++	 ~[0,0] on a 32-bit machine, we would have op0 * op1 == 0, so
++	 we cannot claim that the product is in ~[0,0].  Note that we
++	 are guaranteed to have vr0.type == vr1.type at this
++	 point.  */
++      if (code == MULT_EXPR
++	  && vr0.type == VR_ANTI_RANGE
++	  && (flag_wrapv || TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (op0))))
++	{
++	  set_value_range_to_varying (vr);
++	  return;
++	}
++
+       /* Multiplications and divisions are a bit tricky to handle,
+ 	 depending on the mix of signs we have in the two ranges, we
+ 	 need to operate on different values to get the minimum and
+@@ -1181,7 +1210,20 @@ extract_range_from_binary_expr (value_ra
+     }
+   else if (code == MINUS_EXPR)
+     {
++      /* If we have a MINUS_EXPR with two VR_ANTI_RANGEs, drop to
++	 VR_VARYING.  It would take more effort to compute a precise
++	 range for such a case.  For example, if we have op0 == 1 and
++	 op1 == 1 with their ranges both being ~[0,0], we would have
++	 op0 - op1 == 0, so we cannot claim that the difference is in
++	 ~[0,0].  Note that we are guaranteed to have
++	 vr0.type == vr1.type at this point.  */
++      if (vr0.type == VR_ANTI_RANGE)
++	{
++	  set_value_range_to_varying (vr);
++	  return;
++	}
++
+       /* For MINUS_EXPR, apply the operation to the opposite ends of
+ 	 each range.  */
+       min = vrp_int_const_binop (code, vr0.min, vr1.max);