This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Fix Ada comparison failure on SPARC
- From: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>,Rainer Orth <ro at cebitec dot uni-bielefeld dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org,Richard Sandiford <richard dot sandiford at arm dot com>,Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 14:21:53 +0200
- Subject: Re: Fix Ada comparison failure on SPARC
- References: <yddef1sovkt.fsf@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <20190811102031.GJ2726@tucnak>
On August 11, 2019 12:20:31 PM GMT+02:00, Jakub Jelinek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 12:17:06PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> 2019-08-07 Richard Sandiford <email@example.com>
>> * data-streamer.h (streamer_write_poly_uint64): Declare.
>> (streamer_read_poly_uint64): Likewise.
>> * data-streamer-in.c (streamer_read_poly_uint64): New function.
>> * data-streamer-out.c (streamer_write_poly_uint64): Likewise.
>> * ipa-predicate.h (condition::size): Turn into a poly_int64.
>> (add_condition): Take a poly_int64 size.
>> * ipa-predicate.c (add_condition): Likewise.
>> Looking through it, I noticed this snippet
>> diff --git a/gcc/ipa-predicate.c b/gcc/ipa-predicate.c
>> --- a/gcc/ipa-predicate.c
>> +++ b/gcc/ipa-predicate.c
>> @@ -549,7 +549,7 @@ add_condition (class ipa_fn_summary *sum
>> for (i = 0; vec_safe_iterate (summary->conds, i, &c); i++)
>> if (c->operand_num == operand_num
>> - && c->size == size
>> + && maybe_ne (c->size, size)
>> where changing == to maybe_ne didn't seem right. And indeed changing
>> to maybe_eq as in the following patch fixed the comparison failure.
>Shouldn't that be known_eq instead? Of course, it could make a
>right now solely on aarch64 SVE.
OK with using known_eq.