-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.8k
[ER] A harder case of missed array bound test elision #85660
Copy link
Copy link
Open
Labels
A-LLVMArea: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues.Area: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues.C-optimizationCategory: An issue highlighting optimization opportunities or PRs implementing suchCategory: An issue highlighting optimization opportunities or PRs implementing suchI-slowIssue: Problems and improvements with respect to performance of generated code.Issue: Problems and improvements with respect to performance of generated code.T-compilerRelevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
A-LLVMArea: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues.Area: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues.C-optimizationCategory: An issue highlighting optimization opportunities or PRs implementing suchCategory: An issue highlighting optimization opportunities or PRs implementing suchI-slowIssue: Problems and improvements with respect to performance of generated code.Issue: Problems and improvements with respect to performance of generated code.T-compilerRelevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Type
Fields
Give feedbackNo fields configured for issues without a type.
Another common case where LLVM doesn't infer the safety of the array access:
Compiled with -O it performs a bound test in
arr[pos]:I don't know if a back-end like LLVM is supposed to infer complex situations as this one. Perhaps this is the job of explicit code annotations of pre/post-conditions, loop (in)variants, etc.