On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 12:09:57PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2018, Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 13 Feb 2018, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > > On February 13, 2018 6:51:29 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek
> > > <ja...@redhat.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > On the following testcase, we recurse infinitely, because
> > > > we have float re-association enabled, but also rounding-math, so
> > > > we try to optimize (cst1 + cst2) + cst3 as (cst2 + cst3) + cst1
> > > > but (cst2 + cst3) doesn't simplify and we try again and optimize
> > > > it as (cst3 + cst1) + cst2 and then (cst1 + cst2) + cst3 and so on
> > > > forever. If @0 is not a CONSTANT_CLASS_P, there is not a problem,
> > > > if it is, the code just checks if we can actually simplify the
> > > > operation between cst2 and cst3 into a constant.
> > >
> > > Is there a reason to try simplifying at all for constant @0?
> >
> > Yes. cst2+cst3 might simplify (the operation happens to be exact and not
> > require rounding), which leaves us with only one addition instead of 2.
> >
> > On the other hand, mixing -frounding-math with reassociation seems strange
> > to
> > me, and likely not worth optimizing for.
>
> ./cc1 -quiet t.c -O -frounding-math -fassociative-math
> cc1: warning: -fassociative-math disabled; other options take precedence
You need
./cc1 -quiet t.c -O -fassociative-math -fno-trapping-math -fno-signed-zeros
-frounding-math
> So _maybe_ we should disable these patterns for !flag_associative_math
> when dealing with FP?
We do, this is in block with:
/* We can't reassociate floating-point unless -fassociative-math
or fixed-point plus or minus because of saturation to +-Inf. */
(if ((!FLOAT_TYPE_P (type) || flag_associative_math)
&& !FIXED_POINT_TYPE_P (type))
But that doesn't mean you can't request associative math and rounding math
at the same time.
Jakub
