Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] tree-object-size: Use trees and support negative offsets

[Siddhesh Poyarekar]

On 12/16/21 00:13, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 10:42:29PM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:

On 12/15/21 20:51, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

Shouldn't this also tree_int_cst_compare (old_wholeval, wholeval) ?

AFAICT, there is no situation where wholeval changes but val doesn't, so I
believe the val check should be sufficient.  Do you think otherwise?

Dunno, just something that caught my eye.

How about if I add an assert like so:

  if (tree_int_cst_compare (oldval, val))
    return true;
  else
    {
      gcc_checking_assert (tree_int_cst_compare (old_wholeval,
                           wholeval) == 0);
      return false;
    }