Re: [RFA][PATCH] Fix tree-optimization/59919

[Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>]

On 01/24/14 03:52, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 02:22:35PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> > --- a/gcc/tree-vrp.c
> > +++ b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
> > @@ -5891,8 +5891,13 @@ find_assert_locations_1 (basic_block bb, sbitmap live)
> >   		    }
> >   		}
> >
> > -	      register_new_assert_for (op, op, comp_code, value, bb, NULL, si);
> > -	      need_assert = true;
> > +	      /* Do not register any assertions for a non-returning call.  */
> > +	      if (!is_gimple_call (stmt) || !gimple_call_noreturn_p (stmt))
> > +		{
> > +		  register_new_assert_for (op, op, comp_code,
> > +					   value, bb, NULL, si);
> > +		  need_assert = true;
> > +		}
> >   	    }
> >   	}
>
> I'd say this belongs into infer_value_range instead.
Seems reasonable.  I'll spin that.

The only downside is we lose the ability to backward propagate through a 
typecast which feeds an argument in such a call.   But that's probably 
not a big deal.

Jeff