Hi!

On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 08:53:42AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> The following testcase ends up with SIGFPE in __divmodbitint4.
> The problem is a thinko in my attempt to implement Knuth's algorithm.

Here is an updated version of the patch, the libgcc part is the same,
but I've added a new testcase which tests the behavior of all the changed
cases, so it has a case where uv1:uv0 / vv1 is 1:1, where it is
1:0 and rhat + vv1 overflows and where it is 1:0 and rhat + vv1 does not
overflow, and includes tests also from Zdenek's other failing tests.

Previously successfully bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and
i686-linux, the new version has been retested with
make check-gcc GCC_TEST_RUN_EXPENSIVE=1 RUNTESTFLAGS="GCC_TEST_RUN_EXPENSIVE=1 
dg-torture.exp='bitint-53.c bitint-55.c'"
Ok for trunk?

2024-01-31  Jakub Jelinek  <ja...@redhat.com>

        PR libgcc/113604
        * libgcc2.c (__divmodbitint4): If uv1 >= vv1, subtract
        vv1 from uv1:uv0 once or twice as needed, rather than
        subtracting vv1:vv1.

        * gcc.dg/torture/bitint-53.c: New test.
        * gcc.dg/torture/bitint-55.c: New test.

--- libgcc/libgcc2.c.jj 2024-01-12 10:10:16.000000000 +0100
+++ libgcc/libgcc2.c    2024-01-26 10:27:10.932017695 +0100
@@ -1863,12 +1863,46 @@ __divmodbitint4 (UBILtype *q, SItype qpr
              if (uv1 >= vv1)
                {
                  /* udiv_qrnnd doesn't support quotients which don't
-                    fit into UWtype, so subtract from uv1:uv0 vv1
-                    first.  */
-                 uv1 -= vv1 + __builtin_sub_overflow (uv0, vv1, &uv0);
-                 udiv_qrnnd (qhat, rhat, uv1, uv0, vv1);
-                 if (!__builtin_add_overflow (rhat, vv1, &rhat))
-                   goto again;
+                    fit into UWtype, while Knuth's algorithm originally
+                    uses a double-word by word to double-word division.
+                    Fortunately, the algorithm guarantees that uv1 <= vv1,
+                    because if uv1 > vv1, then even if v would have all
+                    bits in all words below vv1 set, the previous iteration
+                    would be supposed to use qhat larger by 1 and subtract
+                    v.  With uv1 == vv1 and uv0 >= vv1 the double-word
+                    qhat in Knuth's algorithm would be 1 in the upper word
+                    and 1 in the lower word, say for
+                    uv1 0x8000000000000000ULL
+                    uv0 0xffffffffffffffffULL
+                    vv1 0x8000000000000000ULL
+                    0x8000000000000000ffffffffffffffffuwb
+                    / 0x8000000000000000uwb == 0x10000000000000001uwb, and
+                    exactly like that also for any other value
+                    > 0x8000000000000000ULL in uv1 and vv1 and uv0 >= uv1.
+                    So we need to subtract one or at most two vv1s from
+                    uv1:uv0 (qhat because of that decreases by 1 or 2 and
+                    is then representable in UWtype) and need to increase
+                    rhat by vv1 once or twice because of that.  Now, if
+                    we need to subtract 2 vv1s, i.e. if
+                    uv1 == vv1 && uv0 >= vv1, then rhat (which is uv0 - vv1)
+                    + vv1 computation can't overflow, because it is equal
+                    to uv0 and therefore the original algorithm in that case
+                    performs goto again, but the second vv1 addition must
+                    overflow already because vv1 has msb set from the
+                    canonicalization.  */
+                 uv1 -= __builtin_sub_overflow (uv0, vv1, &uv0);
+                 if (uv1 >= vv1)
+                   {
+                     uv1 -= __builtin_sub_overflow (uv0, vv1, &uv0);
+                     udiv_qrnnd (qhat, rhat, uv1, uv0, vv1);
+                     rhat += 2 * vv1;
+                   }
+                 else
+                   {
+                     udiv_qrnnd (qhat, rhat, uv1, uv0, vv1);
+                     if (!__builtin_add_overflow (rhat, vv1, &rhat))
+                       goto again;
+                   }
                }
              else
                {
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/bitint-53.c.jj 2024-01-26 07:23:31.651790252 
+0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/bitint-53.c    2024-01-26 07:23:20.608945843 
+0100
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+/* PR libgcc/113604 */
+/* { dg-do run { target bitint } } */
+/* { dg-options "-std=c23 -pedantic-errors" } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! run_expensive_tests }  { "*" } { "-O0" "-O2" } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! run_expensive_tests } { "-flto" } { "" } } */
+
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 256
+unsigned _BitInt (256) x;
+
+void
+foo (unsigned _BitInt (256) a, unsigned _BitInt (128) b)
+{
+  x = a / b;
+}
+#endif
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 256
+  foo (0xfffffffffffffffffffffc0000000000000000000004uwb, 
0x7ffffffffffffffffffffffffffuwb);
+  if (x != 0x1fffffffffffffffffuwb)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+#endif
+  return 0;
+}
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/bitint-55.c.jj 2024-01-31 12:32:54.554483584 
+0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/bitint-55.c    2024-01-31 15:13:18.411851415 
+0100
@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+/* PR libgcc/113604 */
+/* { dg-do run { target bitint } } */
+/* { dg-options "-std=c23 -pedantic-errors" } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! run_expensive_tests }  { "*" } { "-O0" "-O2" } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! run_expensive_tests } { "-flto" } { "" } } */
+
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 513
+signed _BitInt(513)
+foo (signed _BitInt(513) x, signed _BitInt(513) y)
+{
+  return x % y;
+}
+#endif
+
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 512
+unsigned _BitInt(512)
+bar (unsigned _BitInt(512) x, unsigned _BitInt(512) y)
+{
+  return x % y;
+}
+#endif
+
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 256
+unsigned _BitInt(256)
+baz (unsigned _BitInt(256) x, unsigned _BitInt(256) y)
+{
+  return x % y;
+}
+#endif
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 513
+  if (foo 
(11155754932722990178552651944728825929130437979239421228991532051555943675wb,
+          32783817256434357484609367438786815wb) != 0wb)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+  if (foo (542904728531209767665756029992981529373473101602268731408384wb,
+          235447394450476261134537147263765988105wb)
+      != 235447394450476261116090403190056436489wb)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+  if (foo (542904728531209767665690117878483036079552477922114364506112wb,
+          235447394450476261134537147263765988105wb)
+      != 169535279951982967195466723035689534217wb)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+  if (foo (542904728531209767665690117878483036079534031178040654954496wb,
+          235447394450476261134537147263765988105wb)
+      != 169535279951982967177019978961979982601wb)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+  if (foo (542904728531209767665454670484032559818581851459155356811264wb,
+          235447394450476261134537147263765988105wb)
+      != 169535279951982967359377407340447827474wb)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+#endif
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 512
+  if (bar 
(6703903964971298549787012499102923063739682910296196688861780721860882015036773488400937149083451713845015929093243025426876941405973284973216824503042048uwb,
+          170141183460469231731687303715884105735uwb) != 19208uwb)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+#endif
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 256
+  if (baz 
(115792089237316195423570985008687907853269984665640564039457584007913129639926uwb,
+          68056473384187692692674921486353642292uwb) != 6uwb)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+#endif
+  return 0;
+}


        Jakub

Reply via email to