On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 6:07 AM Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> > After this patch in addition to the problem already reported about
> > vlda1.c and return-value-range-1.c, we have noticed these regressions
> > on aarch64:
> > Running gcc:gcc.target/aarch64/aarch64.exp ...
> > FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/movk
Hi!
On 2023-11-19T16:05:42+0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> this is updated version which also adds testuiste compensation
> I lost earlier while maintaining the patch in my testing tree.
> There are quite few testcases that use constant return values to hide
> something from optimizer.
One more: comm
your patch turned ERROR in FAIL)
Yes, I have; and I even tried to log in there, to point to my commit
mentioned above, which is meant to address this issue -- please let me
know if you're still seeing the FAIL after that commit.
> Thomas, you said in another email that adding -O2 av
Hi!
On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 22:24, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On 2023-11-19T16:05:42+0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/return-value-range-1.c
>
> Pushed to master branch commit a0240662b22312ffb3e3fefb85f258ab0e7010f4
> "Fix 'gcc.dg/tree-ss
Hi Honza!
On 2023-11-21T15:06:54+0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> After this patch in addition to the problem already reported about
>> vlda1.c and return-value-range-1.c, [...]
> return-value_range-1.c should be fixed now and I do not have vlda1.c in
> my tree. I will check.
Typo, I suppose; proba
Hi!
On 2023-11-19T16:05:42+0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/return-value-range-1.c
Pushed to master branch commit a0240662b22312ffb3e3fefb85f258ab0e7010f4
"Fix 'gcc.dg/tree-ssa/return-value-range-1.c' for 'char' defaulting to
'unsigned'", see attache
> After this patch in addition to the problem already reported about
> vlda1.c and return-value-range-1.c, we have noticed these regressions
> on aarch64:
> Running gcc:gcc.target/aarch64/aarch64.exp ...
> FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/movk.c scan-assembler movk\tx[0-9]+, 0x4667, lsl 16
> FAIL: gcc.targ
Hi!
On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 at 16:05, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> Hi,
> this is updated version which also adds testuiste compensation
> I lost earlier while maintaining the patch in my testing tree.
> There are quite few testcases that use constant return values to hide
> something from optimizer.
>
> Bo
> Hi!
>
> On 2023-11-19T16:05:42+0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/return-value-range-1.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> > +/* { dg-do ling } */
>
> ERROR: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/return-value-range-1.c: 1: syntax error for "
> dg-do 1 ling "
>
> With that
Hi!
On 2023-11-19T16:05:42+0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/return-value-range-1.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> +/* { dg-do ling } */
ERROR: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/return-value-range-1.c: 1: syntax error for " dg-do
1 ling "
With that fixed into 'dg-do link',
Hi,
thanks for working on this.
On Sun, Nov 19 2023, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this is updated version which also adds testuiste compensation
> I lost earlier while maintaining the patch in my testing tree.
> There are quite few testcases that use constant return values to hide
> something from
>
> On 11/18/23 20:21, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > this patch implements very basic propaation of return value ranges from VRP
> > pass. This helps std::vector's push_back since we work out value range of
> > allocated block. This propagates only within single translation unit. I
> > hoped
On 11/18/23 20:21, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi,
this patch implements very basic propaation of return value ranges from VRP
pass. This helps std::vector's push_back since we work out value range of
allocated block. This propagates only within single translation unit. I hoped
we will also do the pr
Hi,
this is updated version which also adds testuiste compensation
I lost earlier while maintaining the patch in my testing tree.
There are quite few testcases that use constant return values to hide
something from optimizer.
Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* cgraph.cc
> > +Wsuggest-attribute=returns_nonnull
>
> - or _?
>
> (If changing it, needs adjustment in rest of patch too.)
I was thinking of this and I am not sure what is better.
Sure _ in command line option looks odd, but this is an identifier
and it is returns_nonnull and not returns-nonnull.
I am not
Jan Hubicka writes:
> Hi,
> this patch implements very basic propaation of return value ranges from VRP
> pass. This helps std::vector's push_back since we work out value range of
> allocated block. This propagates only within single translation unit. I
> hoped
> we will also do the propaga
Hi,
this patch implements very basic propaation of return value ranges from VRP
pass. This helps std::vector's push_back since we work out value range of
allocated block. This propagates only within single translation unit. I hoped
we will also do the propagation at WPA stage, but that needs mor
17 matches
Mail list logo
