From b24fd3bccf76821b46c52cf375e460b7e64d4139 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jakub Jelinek Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 13:08:54 +0200 Subject: fold-const: Handle BITINT_TYPE in range_check_type When discussing PR111369 with Andrew Pinski, I've realized that I haven't added BITINT_TYPE handling to range_check_type. Right now (unsigned) max + 1 == (unsigned) min for signed _BitInt,l so I think we don't need to do the extra hops for BITINT_TYPE (though possibly we don't need them for INTEGER_TYPE either in the two's complement word and we don't support anything else, though I really don't know if Ada or some other FEs don't create weird INTEGER_TYPEs). 2023-09-12 Jakub Jelinek * fold-const.cc (range_check_type): Handle BITINT_TYPE like OFFSET_TYPE. --- gcc/fold-const.cc | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'gcc') diff --git a/gcc/fold-const.cc b/gcc/fold-const.cc index d19b466..c5ac822 100644 --- a/gcc/fold-const.cc +++ b/gcc/fold-const.cc @@ -5565,7 +5565,12 @@ range_check_type (tree etype) else return NULL_TREE; } - else if (POINTER_TYPE_P (etype) || TREE_CODE (etype) == OFFSET_TYPE) + else if (POINTER_TYPE_P (etype) + || TREE_CODE (etype) == OFFSET_TYPE + /* Right now all BITINT_TYPEs satisfy + (unsigned) max + 1 == (unsigned) min, so no need to verify + that like for INTEGER_TYPEs. */ + || TREE_CODE (etype) == BITINT_TYPE) etype = unsigned_type_for (etype); return etype; } -- cgit v1.1