File: pr19210-1.c

package info (click to toggle)
gcc-riscv64-unknown-elf 8.3.0.2019.08%2Bdfsg-1
  • links: PTS, VCS
  • area: main
  • in suites: bullseye
  • size: 680,956 kB
  • sloc: ansic: 3,237,715; cpp: 896,882; ada: 772,854; f90: 144,254; asm: 68,788; makefile: 67,456; sh: 29,743; exp: 28,045; objc: 15,273; fortran: 11,885; python: 7,369; pascal: 5,375; awk: 3,725; perl: 2,872; yacc: 316; xml: 311; ml: 285; lex: 198; haskell: 122
file content (29 lines) | stat: -rw-r--r-- 1,065 bytes parent folder | download | duplicates (2) 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
 
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O2 -fopt-info-loop-missed -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations" } */
extern void g(void);

void
f (unsigned n)
{
  unsigned k;
  for(k = 0;k <= n;k++) /* { dg-message "note: missed loop optimization: niters analysis .*" } */
    g();

  for(k = 0;k <= n;k += 4) /* { dg-message "note: missed loop optimization: niters analysis .*" } */
    g();

  /* We used to get warning for this loop.  However, since then # of iterations
     analysis improved, and we can now prove that this loop does not verflow.
     This is because the only case when it would overflow is if n = ~0 (since
     ~0 is divisible by 5), and this cannot be the case, since when we got
     here, the previous loop exited, thus there exists k > n.  */
  for(k = 5;k <= n;k += 5)
    g();

  /* So we need the following loop, instead.  */
  for(k = 4;k <= n;k += 5) /* { dg-message "note: missed loop optimization: niters analysis .*" } */
    g();
  
  for(k = 15;k >= n;k--) /* { dg-message "note: missed loop optimization: niters analysis .*" } */
    g();
}