diff mbox series

lower-bitint: Fix up lowering of huge _BitInt 0 PHI args [PR113120]

Message ID ZZZzov90j4WZ/03I@tucnak
State Unresolved
Headers
Series lower-bitint: Fix up lowering of huge _BitInt 0 PHI args [PR113120] |

Checks

Context Check Description
snail/gcc-patch-check warning Git am fail log

Commit Message

Jakub Jelinek Jan. 4, 2024, 9 a.m. UTC 
  Hi!

The PHI argument expansion of INTEGER_CSTs where bitint_min_cst_precision
returns significantly smaller precision than the PHI result precision is
optimized by loading the much smaller constant (if any) from memory and
then either setting the remaining limbs to {} or calling memset with -1.
The case where no constant is loaded (i.e. c == NULL) is when the
INTEGER_CST is 0 or all_ones - in that case we can just set all the limbs
to {} or call memset with -1 on everything.
While for the all ones extension case that is what the code was already
doing, I missed one spot in the zero extension case, where constricting
the offset of the MEM_REF lhs of the = {} store it was using unconditionally
the byte size of c, which obviously doesn't work if c is NULL.  In that case
we want to use zero offset.

Fixed thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for
trunk?

2024-01-04  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

	PR tree-optimization/113120
	* gimple-lower-bitint.cc (gimple_lower_bitint): Fix handling of very
	large _BitInt zero INTEGER_CST PHI argument.

	* gcc.dg/bitint-62.c: New test.


	Jakub

Comments

Richard Biener Jan. 8, 2024, 12:48 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Thu, 4 Jan 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> The PHI argument expansion of INTEGER_CSTs where bitint_min_cst_precision
> returns significantly smaller precision than the PHI result precision is
> optimized by loading the much smaller constant (if any) from memory and
> then either setting the remaining limbs to {} or calling memset with -1.
> The case where no constant is loaded (i.e. c == NULL) is when the
> INTEGER_CST is 0 or all_ones - in that case we can just set all the limbs
> to {} or call memset with -1 on everything.
> While for the all ones extension case that is what the code was already
> doing, I missed one spot in the zero extension case, where constricting
> the offset of the MEM_REF lhs of the = {} store it was using unconditionally
> the byte size of c, which obviously doesn't work if c is NULL.  In that case
> we want to use zero offset.
> 
> Fixed thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for
> trunk?

OK.

Richard.

> 2024-01-04  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>
> 
> 	PR tree-optimization/113120
> 	* gimple-lower-bitint.cc (gimple_lower_bitint): Fix handling of very
> 	large _BitInt zero INTEGER_CST PHI argument.
> 
> 	* gcc.dg/bitint-62.c: New test.
> 
> --- gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc.jj	2024-01-03 11:51:27.000000000 +0100
> +++ gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc	2024-01-03 13:53:30.699328045 +0100
> @@ -6582,8 +6582,12 @@ gimple_lower_bitint (void)
>  			= build_array_type_nelts (large_huge.m_limb_type,
>  						  nelts);
>  		      tree ptype = build_pointer_type (TREE_TYPE (v1));
> -		      tree off = fold_convert (ptype,
> -					       TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (TREE_TYPE (c)));
> +		      tree off;
> +		      if (c)
> +			off = fold_convert (ptype,
> +					    TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (TREE_TYPE (c)));
> +		      else
> +			off = build_zero_cst (ptype);
>  		      tree vd = build2 (MEM_REF, vtype,
>  					build_fold_addr_expr (v1), off);
>  		      g = gimple_build_assign (vd, build_zero_cst (vtype));
> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitint-62.c.jj	2024-01-03 14:11:22.332301884 +0100
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitint-62.c	2024-01-03 14:10:58.219640178 +0100
> @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
> +/* PR tree-optimization/113120 */
> +/* { dg-do compile { target bitint } } */
> +/* { dg-options "-std=c23 -O2" } */
> +
> +_BitInt(8) a;
> +_BitInt(55) b;
> +
> +#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 401
> +static __attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void
> +foo (unsigned _BitInt(1) c, _BitInt(401) d)
> +{
> +  c /= d << b;
> +  a = c;
> +}
> +
> +void
> +bar (void)
> +{
> +  foo (1, 4);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 6928
> +_BitInt(6928)
> +baz (int x, _BitInt(6928) y)
> +{
> +  if (x)
> +    return y;
> +  else
> +    return 0;
> +}
> +#endif
> 
> 	Jakub
> 
>
diff mbox series

Patch

--- gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc.jj	2024-01-03 11:51:27.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.cc	2024-01-03 13:53:30.699328045 +0100
@@ -6582,8 +6582,12 @@  gimple_lower_bitint (void)
 			= build_array_type_nelts (large_huge.m_limb_type,
 						  nelts);
 		      tree ptype = build_pointer_type (TREE_TYPE (v1));
-		      tree off = fold_convert (ptype,
-					       TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (TREE_TYPE (c)));
+		      tree off;
+		      if (c)
+			off = fold_convert (ptype,
+					    TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (TREE_TYPE (c)));
+		      else
+			off = build_zero_cst (ptype);
 		      tree vd = build2 (MEM_REF, vtype,
 					build_fold_addr_expr (v1), off);
 		      g = gimple_build_assign (vd, build_zero_cst (vtype));
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitint-62.c.jj	2024-01-03 14:11:22.332301884 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitint-62.c	2024-01-03 14:10:58.219640178 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ 
+/* PR tree-optimization/113120 */
+/* { dg-do compile { target bitint } } */
+/* { dg-options "-std=c23 -O2" } */
+
+_BitInt(8) a;
+_BitInt(55) b;
+
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 401
+static __attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void
+foo (unsigned _BitInt(1) c, _BitInt(401) d)
+{
+  c /= d << b;
+  a = c;
+}
+
+void
+bar (void)
+{
+  foo (1, 4);
+}
+#endif
+
+#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 6928
+_BitInt(6928)
+baz (int x, _BitInt(6928) y)
+{
+  if (x)
+    return y;
+  else
+    return 0;
+}
+#endif