From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrea Corallo via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46670: 28.0.50; [feature/native-comp] possible miscompilation affecting lsp-mode Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:04:06 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87a6ry46uc.fsf@collares.org> Reply-To: Andrea Corallo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5732"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 46670@debbugs.gnu.org, Mauricio Collares To: Pip Cet Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 24 10:05:48 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lEq7A-0001Gv-4U for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 10:05:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37368 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lEq79-00049J-0s for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:05:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45588) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lEq6Q-00047l-O2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:05:04 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:49968) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lEq6Q-000854-12 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:05:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lEq6P-0001KM-PD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:05:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Andrea Corallo Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:05:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46670 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 46670-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46670.16141574585038 (code B ref 46670); Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:05:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46670) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Feb 2021 09:04:18 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33281 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lEq5h-0001JC-Vq for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:04:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:64668) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lEq5f-0001Iy-M5 for 46670@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:04:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mab (ma.sdf.org [205.166.94.33]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id 11O9461O018143 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:04:06 GMT In-Reply-To: (Pip Cet's message of "Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:31:56 +0000") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:200707 Archived-At: Pip Cet writes: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 11:36 PM Andrea Corallo wrote: >> Pip Cet writes: >> >> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:12 PM Andrea Corallo wrote: >> >> We'll probably see other bugs in this area cause is tricky, is important >> >> we build the best coverage we can for this in the testsuite. >> > >> > Is this one of them, or am I confused? >> >> What's suspitions with that? At present I'm admittedly quite done but >> it looks okay to me. > > We're emitting > > (assume ,lhs (and ,lhs ,rhs)) > > even when NEGATED is t. Nope, when NEGATED is t the complete sequence we are emitting is (see line just following your diff hunk): (assume tmp-mvar (not rhs)) (assume lhs (and lhs tmp-mvar)) That's indeed the reason why it's working in the 39 testcases. Andrea >> BTW applying the patch and running comp-tests.el I get 39 regressions. > > That's expected, because we need to replace the incorrect assume by > correct ones to actually get to the same level of optimization.