[DA] Add tests where dependencies are missed due to overflow (NFC) #164246
+518
−0
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@ | ||
| ; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_analyze_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --version 6 | ||
| ; RUN: opt < %s -disable-output "-passes=print<da>" 2>&1 \ | ||
| ; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-ALL | ||
| ; RUN: opt < %s -disable-output "-passes=print<da>" -da-enable-dependence-test=gcd-miv 2>&1 \ | ||
| ; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-GCD-MIV | ||
|
|
||
| ; offset0 = 4; | ||
| ; offset1 = 0; | ||
| ; for (i = 0; i < 100; i++) { | ||
| ; A[offset0] = 1; | ||
| ; A[offset1] = 2; | ||
| ; offset0 += 3*m; | ||
| ; offset1 += 3; | ||
| ; } | ||
| ; | ||
| ; FIXME: DependenceAnalysis currently detects no dependency between the two | ||
| ; stores, but it does exist. E.g., consider `m` is 12297829382473034411, which | ||
| ; is a modular multiplicative inverse of 3 under modulo 2^64. Then `offset0` is | ||
| ; effectively `i + 4`, so accesses will be as follows: | ||
| ; | ||
| ; - A[offset0] : A[4], A[5], A[6], ... | ||
| ; - A[offset1] : A[0], A[3], A[6], ... | ||
| ; | ||
| ; The root cause is that DA interprets `3*m` in non-modular arithmetic, which | ||
| ; isn't necessarily true due to overflow. | ||
| ; | ||
| define void @gcdmiv_coef_ovfl(ptr %A, i64 %m) { | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-LABEL: 'gcdmiv_coef_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; | ||
| ; CHECK-GCD-MIV-LABEL: 'gcdmiv_coef_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-GCD-MIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-GCD-MIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; CHECK-GCD-MIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-GCD-MIV-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-GCD-MIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-GCD-MIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; | ||
| entry: | ||
| %step = mul i64 3, %m | ||
| br label %loop | ||
|
|
||
| loop: | ||
| %i = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %i.inc, %loop ] | ||
| %offset.0 = phi i64 [ 4, %entry ] , [ %offset.0.next, %loop ] | ||
| %offset.1 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ] , [ %offset.1.next, %loop ] | ||
| %gep.0 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %offset.0 | ||
| %gep.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %offset.1 | ||
| store i8 1, ptr %gep.0 | ||
| store i8 2, ptr %gep.1 | ||
| %i.inc = add nuw nsw i64 %i, 1 | ||
| %offset.0.next = add nsw i64 %offset.0, %step | ||
| %offset.1.next = add nsw i64 %offset.1, 3 | ||
| %ec = icmp eq i64 %i.inc, 100 | ||
| br i1 %ec, label %exit, label %loop | ||
|
|
||
| exit: | ||
| ret void | ||
| } | ||
| ;; NOTE: These prefixes are unused and the list is autogenerated. Do not add tests below this line: | ||
| ; CHECK: {{.*}} |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ | ||
| ; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_analyze_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --version 6 | ||
| ; RUN: opt < %s -disable-output "-passes=print<da>" 2>&1 \ | ||
| ; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-ALL | ||
| ; RUN: opt < %s -disable-output "-passes=print<da>" -da-enable-dependence-test=strong-siv 2>&1 \ | ||
| ; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-STRONG-SIV | ||
|
|
||
| ; for (i = 0; i < (1LL << 62); i++) { | ||
| ; if (0 <= 2*i - 2) | ||
| ; A[2*i - 2] = 1; | ||
| ; | ||
| ; if (0 <= 2*i - 4) | ||
| ; A[2*i - 4] = 2; | ||
| ; } | ||
| ; | ||
| ; FIXME: DependenceAnalysis currently detects no dependency between the two | ||
| ; stores, but it does exist. For example, each store will access A[0] when i | ||
| ; is 1 and 2 respectively. | ||
| ; The root cause is that the product of the BTC and the coefficient | ||
| ; ((1LL << 62) - 1 and 2) overflows in a signed sense. | ||
| define void @strongsiv_const_ovfl(ptr %A) { | ||
| ; CHECK-LABEL: 'strongsiv_const_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: Src: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; | ||
| entry: | ||
| br label %loop.header | ||
|
|
||
| loop.header: | ||
| %i = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %i.inc, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %offset.0 = phi i64 [ -2, %entry ], [ %offset.0.next, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %offset.1 = phi i64 [ -4, %entry ], [ %offset.1.next, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %ec = icmp eq i64 %i, 4611686018427387904 | ||
| br i1 %ec, label %exit, label %loop.body | ||
|
|
||
| loop.body: | ||
| %cond.0 = icmp sge i64 %offset.0, 0 | ||
| %cond.1 = icmp sge i64 %offset.1, 0 | ||
| br i1 %cond.0, label %if.then.0, label %loop.middle | ||
|
|
||
| if.then.0: | ||
| %gep.0 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %offset.0 | ||
| store i8 1, ptr %gep.0 | ||
| br label %loop.middle | ||
|
|
||
| loop.middle: | ||
| br i1 %cond.1, label %if.then.1, label %loop.latch | ||
|
|
||
| if.then.1: | ||
| %gep.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %offset.1 | ||
| store i8 2, ptr %gep.1 | ||
| br label %loop.latch | ||
|
|
||
| loop.latch: | ||
| %i.inc = add nuw nsw i64 %i, 1 | ||
| %offset.0.next = add nsw i64 %offset.0, 2 | ||
| %offset.1.next = add nsw i64 %offset.1, 2 | ||
| br label %loop.header | ||
|
|
||
| exit: | ||
| ret void | ||
| } | ||
| ;; NOTE: These prefixes are unused and the list is autogenerated. Do not add tests below this line: | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL: {{.*}} | ||
| ; CHECK-STRONG-SIV: {{.*}} |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,137 @@ | ||
| ; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_analyze_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --version 6 | ||
| ; RUN: opt < %s -disable-output "-passes=print<da>" 2>&1 \ | ||
| ; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-ALL | ||
| ; RUN: opt < %s -disable-output "-passes=print<da>" -da-enable-dependence-test=symbolic-rdiv 2>&1 \ | ||
| ; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV | ||
|
|
||
| ; for (i = 0; i < (1LL << 62); i++) { | ||
| ; if (0 <= 2*i - 2) | ||
| ; A[2*i - 2] = 1; | ||
| ; A[i] = 2; | ||
| ; } | ||
| ; | ||
| ; FIXME: DependenceAnalysis currently detects no dependency between the two | ||
| ; stores, but it does exist. For example, each store will access A[0] when i | ||
| ; is 1 and 0 respectively. | ||
| ; The root cause is that the product of the BTC and the coefficient | ||
| ; ((1LL << 62) - 1 and 2) overflows in a signed sense. | ||
| define void @symbolicrdiv_prod_ovfl(ptr %A) { | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-LABEL: 'symbolicrdiv_prod_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-LABEL: 'symbolicrdiv_prod_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; | ||
| entry: | ||
| br label %loop.header | ||
|
|
||
| loop.header: | ||
| %i = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %i.inc, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %offset = phi i64 [ -2, %entry ], [ %offset.next, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %ec = icmp eq i64 %i, 4611686018427387904 | ||
| br i1 %ec, label %exit, label %loop.body | ||
|
|
||
| loop.body: | ||
| %cond = icmp sge i64 %offset, 0 | ||
| br i1 %cond, label %if.then, label %loop.latch | ||
|
|
||
| if.then: | ||
| %gep.0 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %offset | ||
| store i8 1, ptr %gep.0 | ||
| br label %loop.latch | ||
|
|
||
| loop.latch: | ||
| %gep.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %i | ||
| store i8 2, ptr %gep.1 | ||
| %i.inc = add nuw nsw i64 %i, 1 | ||
| %offset.next = add nsw i64 %offset, 2 | ||
| br label %loop.header | ||
|
|
||
| exit: | ||
| ret void | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| ; offset0 = -4611686018427387904; // -2^62 | ||
| ; offset1 = 4611686018427387904; // 2^62 | ||
| ; for (i = 0; i < (1LL << 62) - 100; i++) { | ||
| ; if (0 <= offset0) | ||
| ; A[offset0] = 1; | ||
| ; if (0 <= offset1) | ||
| ; A[offset1] = 2; | ||
| ; offset0 += 2; | ||
| ; offset1 -= 1; | ||
| ; } | ||
| ; | ||
| ; FIXME: DependenceAnalysis currently detects no dependency between the two | ||
| ; stores, but it does exist. For example, | ||
| ; | ||
| ; memory access | i == 2^61 | i == 2^61 + 2^59 | i == 2^61 + 2^60 | ||
| ; -------------------------|-----------|------------------|------------------- | ||
| ; A[2*i - 2^62] (offset0) | | A[2^60] | A[2^61] | ||
| ; A[-i + 2^62] (offset1) | A[2^61] | | A[2^60] | ||
| ; | ||
| ; The root cause is that the calculation of the differenct between the two | ||
| ; constants (-2^62 and 2^62) overflows in a signed sense. | ||
| define void @symbolicrdiv_delta_ovfl(ptr %A) { | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-LABEL: 'symbolicrdiv_delta_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-LABEL: 'symbolicrdiv_delta_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %gep.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 2, ptr %gep.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-SYMBOLIC-RDIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; | ||
| entry: | ||
| br label %loop.header | ||
|
|
||
| loop.header: | ||
| %i = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %i.inc, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %offset.0 = phi i64 [ -4611686018427387904, %entry ], [ %offset.0.next, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %offset.1 = phi i64 [ 4611686018427387904, %entry ], [ %offset.1.next, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %cond.0 = icmp sge i64 %offset.0, 0 | ||
| %cond.1 = icmp sge i64 %offset.1, 0 | ||
| br i1 %cond.0, label %if.then.0, label %loop.middle | ||
|
|
||
| if.then.0: | ||
| %gep.0 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %offset.0 | ||
| store i8 1, ptr %gep.0 | ||
| br label %loop.middle | ||
|
|
||
| loop.middle: | ||
| br i1 %cond.1, label %if.then.1, label %loop.latch | ||
|
|
||
| if.then.1: | ||
| %gep.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %offset.1 | ||
| store i8 2, ptr %gep.1 | ||
| br label %loop.latch | ||
|
|
||
| loop.latch: | ||
| %i.inc = add nuw nsw i64 %i, 1 | ||
| %offset.0.next = add nsw i64 %offset.0, 2 | ||
| %offset.1.next = sub nsw i64 %offset.1, 1 | ||
| %ec = icmp eq i64 %i.inc, 4611686018427387804 ; 2^62 - 100 | ||
| br i1 %ec, label %exit, label %loop.header | ||
|
|
||
| exit: | ||
| ret void | ||
| } | ||
| ;; NOTE: These prefixes are unused and the list is autogenerated. Do not add tests below this line: | ||
| ; CHECK: {{.*}} | ||
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@ | ||
| ; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_analyze_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --version 6 | ||
| ; RUN: opt < %s -disable-output "-passes=print<da>" 2>&1 \ | ||
| ; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-ALL | ||
| ; RUN: opt < %s -disable-output "-passes=print<da>" -da-enable-dependence-test=weak-crossing-siv 2>&1 \ | ||
| ; RUN: | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV | ||
|
|
||
| ; max_i = INT64_MAX/3 // 3074457345618258602 | ||
| ; for (long long i = 0; i <= max_i; i++) { | ||
| ; A[-3*i + INT64_MAX] = 0; | ||
| ; if (i) | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Does the There was a problem hiding this comment. The purpose of this condition (and similar ones in other cases) is to avoid UB caused by the combination of the size limitation of allocated objects and There was a problem hiding this comment. I've seen it in the other cases to avoid the subscripts becoming negative. In this case, However, I see the point, we can/should leave it to be on the safe side. There was a problem hiding this comment. This is |
||
| ; A[3*i - 2] = 1; | ||
| ; } | ||
| ; | ||
| ; FIXME: DependenceAnalysis currently detects no dependency between | ||
| ; `A[-3*i + INT64_MAX]` and `A[3*i - 2]`, but it does exist. For example, | ||
| ; | ||
| ; memory access | i == 1 | i == max_i | ||
| ; ---------------------|------------------|------------------ | ||
| ; A[-3*i + INT64_MAX] | A[INT64_MAX - 3] | A[1] | ||
| ; A[3*i - 2] | A[1] | A[INT64_MAX - 3] | ||
| ; | ||
| ; The root cause is that the calculation of the differenct between the two | ||
| ; constants (INT64_MAX and -2) triggers an overflow. | ||
|
|
||
| define void @weakcorssing_delta_ovfl(ptr %A) { | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-LABEL: 'weakcorssing_delta_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-LABEL: 'weakcorssing_delta_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; | ||
| entry: | ||
| br label %loop.header | ||
|
|
||
| loop.header: | ||
| %i = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %i.inc, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %subscript.0 = phi i64 [ 9223372036854775807, %entry ], [ %subscript.0.next, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %subscript.1 = phi i64 [ -2, %entry ], [ %subscript.1.next, %loop.latch ] | ||
| %idx.0 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %subscript.0 | ||
| store i8 0, ptr %idx.0 | ||
| %cond.store = icmp ne i64 %i, 0 | ||
| br i1 %cond.store, label %if.store, label %loop.latch | ||
|
|
||
| if.store: | ||
| %idx.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %subscript.1 | ||
| store i8 1, ptr %idx.1 | ||
| br label %loop.latch | ||
|
|
||
| loop.latch: | ||
| %i.inc = add nuw nsw i64 %i, 1 | ||
| %subscript.0.next = add nsw i64 %subscript.0, -3 | ||
| %subscript.1.next = add nsw i64 %subscript.1, 3 | ||
| %ec = icmp sgt i64 %i.inc, 3074457345618258602 | ||
| br i1 %ec, label %exit, label %loop.header | ||
|
|
||
| exit: | ||
| ret void | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| ; max_i = INT64_MAX/3 // 3074457345618258602 | ||
| ; for (long long i = 0; i <= max_i; i++) { | ||
| ; A[-3*i + INT64_MAX] = 0; | ||
| ; A[3*i + 1] = 1; | ||
| ; } | ||
| ; | ||
| ; FIXME: DependenceAnalysis currently detects no dependency between | ||
| ; `A[-3*i + INT64_MAX]` and `A[3*i - 2]`, but it does exist. For example, | ||
| ; | ||
| ; memory access | i == 0 | i == 1 | i == max_i - 1 | i == max_i | ||
| ; ---------------------|--------|------------------|----------------|------------------ | ||
| ; A[-3*i + INT64_MAX] | | A[INT64_MAX - 3] | A[1] | | ||
| ; A[3*i + 1] | A[1] | | | A[INT64_MAX - 3] | ||
| ; | ||
| ; The root cause is that the product of the BTC, the coefficient, and 2 | ||
| ; triggers an overflow. | ||
| ; | ||
| define void @weakcorssing_prod_ovfl(ptr %A) { | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-LABEL: 'weakcorssing_prod_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-ALL-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-LABEL: 'weakcorssing_prod_ovfl' | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 0, ptr %idx.0, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: da analyze - none! | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: Src: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 --> Dst: store i8 1, ptr %idx.1, align 1 | ||
| ; CHECK-WEAK-CROSSING-SIV-NEXT: da analyze - consistent output [*]! | ||
| ; | ||
| entry: | ||
| br label %loop | ||
|
|
||
| loop: | ||
| %i = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %i.inc, %loop ] | ||
| %subscript.0 = phi i64 [ 9223372036854775807, %entry ], [ %subscript.0.next, %loop ] | ||
| %subscript.1 = phi i64 [ 1, %entry ], [ %subscript.1.next, %loop ] | ||
| %idx.0 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %subscript.0 | ||
| %idx.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, ptr %A, i64 %subscript.1 | ||
| store i8 0, ptr %idx.0 | ||
| store i8 1, ptr %idx.1 | ||
| %i.inc = add nuw nsw i64 %i, 1 | ||
| %subscript.0.next = add nsw i64 %subscript.0, -3 | ||
| %subscript.1.next = add nsw i64 %subscript.1, 3 | ||
| %ec = icmp sgt i64 %i.inc, 3074457345618258602 | ||
| br i1 %ec, label %exit, label %loop | ||
|
|
||
| exit: | ||
| ret void | ||
| } | ||
| ;; NOTE: These prefixes are unused and the list is autogenerated. Do not add tests below this line: | ||
| ; CHECK: {{.*}} | ||
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍