This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: A combiner type optimization is causing a failure

From: "Pranav Bhandarkar" <pranav dot bhandarkar at gmail dot com>
To: "Paolo Bonzini" <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
Cc: gcc at gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 20:08:45 +0530
Subject: Re: A combiner type optimization is causing a failure
Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=KSHLp2TzTH1kIPGQy1h83yQBn1DOdiHjTVRi3MGz7hMrFqTnR5hu7aKidfswaML/f42k6caVTfYcyzHoZ3744JPAtceyusz8LmSlS2/1kJtl2FjYCViVQ0N7IX8JlKKGpFOTW6QFHMuk1q9iHyYdvFqX1wNdQyCcaUeyERjEs2Y=
References: <649555d50702220556n184dda0eq6a568ca9471152e7@mail.gmail.com> <45DDA9F2.5080705@lu.unisi.ch>

On 2/22/07, Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@lu.unisi.ch> wrote:


> My question is that, IMO the test is checking overflow behaviour. Is
> it right to have such a test ?

Would you care to prepare a patch that moved it under gcc.dg, adding a {
dg-options "-O2 -fno-strict-overflow" } marker (or maybe "-O2
-fno-wrapv")?  But your optimization should also be conditional on
whether strict overflow behavior is requested.

Paolo

Thanks, I will prepare a patch. A 'strict overflow behaviour' check
also makes sense.
Thank you,
Pranav

References:
- A combiner type optimization is causing a failure
  - From: Pranav Bhandarkar
- Re: A combiner type optimization is causing a failure
  - From: Paolo Bonzini

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]