| Message ID | 53BA4458.30804@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Kugan <kugan.vivekanandarajah@linaro.org> wrote: >> For -fwrapv I don't see why you'd get into trouble ever, the VRP computation >> should be well aware of the -fwrapv semantics and the value ranges should >> reflect that. >> >> For -fno-strict-overflow, I have no idea since it is very weirdly defined. >> >> In any case, for your example above, the loop is always well defined, >> because for char/short a++ is performed as: >> a = (short) ((int) a + 1) >> So, if the patch turns it into infinite loop, with -Os -fno-strict-overflow >> or -Os, it is simply a problem with the patch. VR [1, 32768] looks correct, >> a++ is performed only if a is >= 0, therefore before addition [0, 32767]. >> But from VR [1, 32768] you can't optimize away the sign extension, make sure >> you don't have there off-by-one? I have fixed the above bug yesterday. >> It would be nice if the patch contained some testcases, it is easy >> to construct testcases where you have arbitrary VRs on some SSA_NAMEs, >> you just need something to stick the VR on, so you can do something like: >> type foo (type a) >> { >> if (a < VR_min + 1 || a > VR_max + 1) return; // If VR_min is type minimum or VR_max type maximum this needs to be adjusted of course. >> a = a + 1; >> // now you can try some cast that your optimization would try to optimize >> return a; >> } >> Or void bar (type a) { a = (a & mask) + bias; (or similarly) } >> Make sure to cover the boundary cases, where VR minimum or maximum still >> allow optimizing away zero and/or sign extensions, and another case where >> they are +- 1 and already don't allow it. > > > Hi Jakub, > > For -fwrapv, it is due to how PROMOTE_MODE is defined in arm back-end. > In the test-case, a function (which has signed char return type) returns > -1 in one of the paths. ARM PROMOTE_MODE changes that to 255 and relies > on zero/sign extension generated by RTL again for the correct value. I > saw some other targets also defining similar think. I am therefore > skipping removing zero/sign extension if the ssa variable can be set to > negative integer constants. Hm? I think you should rather check that you are removing a sign-/zero-extension - PROMOTE_MODE tells you if it will sign- or zero-extend. Definitely + /* In some architectures, negative integer constants are truncated and + sign changed with target defined PROMOTE_MODE macro. This will impact + the value range seen here and produce wrong code if zero/sign extensions + are eliminated. Therefore, return false if this SSA can have negative + integers. */ + if (is_gimple_assign (stmt) + && (TREE_CODE_CLASS (gimple_assign_rhs_code (stmt)) == tcc_unary)) + { + tree rhs1 = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt); + if (TREE_CODE (rhs1) == INTEGER_CST + && !TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)) + && tree_int_cst_compare (rhs1, integer_zero_node) == -1) + return false; looks completely bogus ... (an unary op with a constant operand?) instead you want to do sth like mode = TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (ssa)); rhs_uns = TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)); PROMOTE_MODE (mode, rhs_uns, TREE_TYPE (ssa)); instead of initializing rhs_uns from ssas type. That is, if PROMOTE_MODE tells you to promote _not_ according to ssas sign then honor that. > As for the -fno-strict-overflow case, if the variables overflows, in VRP > dumps, I see +INF(OVF), but the value range stored in ssa has TYPE_MAX. > We therefore should limit the comparison to (TYPE_MIN < VR_MIN && VR_MAX > < TYPE_MAX) instead of (TYPE_MIN <= VR_MIN && VR_MAX <= TYPE_MAX) when > checking to be sure that this is not the overflowing case. Attached > patch changes this. I don't think that's necessary - the overflow cases happen only when that overflow has undefined behavior, thus any valid program will have values <= MAX. Richard. > I have bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and regression tested > for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, arm-none-linux-gnueabi (using qemu), > aarch64_be-none-elf (Foundation model), aarch64-none-elf > --with-abi=ilp32 (Foundation model) and s390x-ibm-linux (64bit, using > qemu) with no new regression. > > Is this OK? > > Thanks, > Kugan > > gcc/ > 2014-07-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah <kuganv@linaro.org> > > * calls.c (precompute_arguments): Check is_promoted_for_type > and set the promoted mode. > (is_promoted_for_type): New function. > (expand_expr_real_1): Check is_promoted_for_type > and set the promoted mode. > * expr.h (is_promoted_for_type): New function definition. > * cfgexpand.c (expand_gimple_stmt_1): Call emit_move_insn if > SUBREG is promoted with SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED. > > > gcc/testsuite > > 2014-07-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah <kuganv@linaro.org> > > * gcc.dg/zero_sign_ext_test.c: New test.
Thanks foe the review and suggestions. On 10/07/14 22:15, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Kugan <kugan.vivekanandarajah@linaro.org> wrote: [...] >> >> For -fwrapv, it is due to how PROMOTE_MODE is defined in arm back-end. >> In the test-case, a function (which has signed char return type) returns >> -1 in one of the paths. ARM PROMOTE_MODE changes that to 255 and relies >> on zero/sign extension generated by RTL again for the correct value. I >> saw some other targets also defining similar think. I am therefore >> skipping removing zero/sign extension if the ssa variable can be set to >> negative integer constants. > > Hm? I think you should rather check that you are removing a > sign-/zero-extension - PROMOTE_MODE tells you if it will sign- or > zero-extend. Definitely > > + /* In some architectures, negative integer constants are truncated and > + sign changed with target defined PROMOTE_MODE macro. This will impact > + the value range seen here and produce wrong code if zero/sign extensions > + are eliminated. Therefore, return false if this SSA can have negative > + integers. */ > + if (is_gimple_assign (stmt) > + && (TREE_CODE_CLASS (gimple_assign_rhs_code (stmt)) == tcc_unary)) > + { > + tree rhs1 = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt); > + if (TREE_CODE (rhs1) == INTEGER_CST > + && !TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)) > + && tree_int_cst_compare (rhs1, integer_zero_node) == -1) > + return false; > > looks completely bogus ... (an unary op with a constant operand?) > instead you want to do sth like I see that unary op with a constant operand is not possible in gimple. What I wanted to check here is any sort of constant loads; but seems that will not happen in gimple. Is PHI statements the only possible statements where we will end up with such constants. > mode = TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (ssa)); > rhs_uns = TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)); > PROMOTE_MODE (mode, rhs_uns, TREE_TYPE (ssa)); > > instead of initializing rhs_uns from ssas type. That is, if > PROMOTE_MODE tells you to promote _not_ according to ssas sign then > honor that. This is triggered in pr43017.c in function foo for arm-none-linux-gnueabi. where, the gimple statement that cause this looks like: ..... # _3 = PHI <_17(7), -1(2)> bb43: return _3; ARM PROMOTE_MODE changes the sign for integer constants only and hence looking at the variable with PROMOTE_MODE is not changing the sign in this case. #define PROMOTE_MODE(MODE, UNSIGNEDP, TYPE) \ if (GET_MODE_CLASS (MODE) == MODE_INT \ && GET_MODE_SIZE (MODE) < 4) \ { \ if (MODE == QImode) \ UNSIGNEDP = 1; \ else if (MODE == HImode) \ UNSIGNEDP = 1; \ (MODE) = SImode; \ } >> As for the -fno-strict-overflow case, if the variables overflows, in VRP >> dumps, I see +INF(OVF), but the value range stored in ssa has TYPE_MAX. >> We therefore should limit the comparison to (TYPE_MIN < VR_MIN && VR_MAX >> < TYPE_MAX) instead of (TYPE_MIN <= VR_MIN && VR_MAX <= TYPE_MAX) when >> checking to be sure that this is not the overflowing case. Attached >> patch changes this. > > I don't think that's necessary - the overflow cases happen only when > that overflow has undefined behavior, thus any valid program will have > values <= MAX. I see that you have now removed +INF(OVF). I will change it this way. Thanks again, Kugan
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Kugan <kugan.vivekanandarajah@linaro.org> wrote: > Thanks foe the review and suggestions. > > On 10/07/14 22:15, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Kugan <kugan.vivekanandarajah@linaro.org> wrote: > > [...] > >>> >>> For -fwrapv, it is due to how PROMOTE_MODE is defined in arm back-end. >>> In the test-case, a function (which has signed char return type) returns >>> -1 in one of the paths. ARM PROMOTE_MODE changes that to 255 and relies >>> on zero/sign extension generated by RTL again for the correct value. I >>> saw some other targets also defining similar think. I am therefore >>> skipping removing zero/sign extension if the ssa variable can be set to >>> negative integer constants. >> >> Hm? I think you should rather check that you are removing a >> sign-/zero-extension - PROMOTE_MODE tells you if it will sign- or >> zero-extend. Definitely >> >> + /* In some architectures, negative integer constants are truncated and >> + sign changed with target defined PROMOTE_MODE macro. This will impact >> + the value range seen here and produce wrong code if zero/sign extensions >> + are eliminated. Therefore, return false if this SSA can have negative >> + integers. */ >> + if (is_gimple_assign (stmt) >> + && (TREE_CODE_CLASS (gimple_assign_rhs_code (stmt)) == tcc_unary)) >> + { >> + tree rhs1 = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt); >> + if (TREE_CODE (rhs1) == INTEGER_CST >> + && !TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)) >> + && tree_int_cst_compare (rhs1, integer_zero_node) == -1) >> + return false; >> >> looks completely bogus ... (an unary op with a constant operand?) >> instead you want to do sth like > > I see that unary op with a constant operand is not possible in gimple. > What I wanted to check here is any sort of constant loads; but seems > that will not happen in gimple. Is PHI statements the only possible > statements where we will end up with such constants. No, in theory you can have ssa_1 = -1; but that's not unary but a GIMPLE_SINGLE_RHS and thus gimple_assign_rhs_code (stmt) == INTEGER_CST. >> mode = TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (ssa)); >> rhs_uns = TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)); >> PROMOTE_MODE (mode, rhs_uns, TREE_TYPE (ssa)); >> >> instead of initializing rhs_uns from ssas type. That is, if >> PROMOTE_MODE tells you to promote _not_ according to ssas sign then >> honor that. > > This is triggered in pr43017.c in function foo for arm-none-linux-gnueabi. > > where, the gimple statement that cause this looks like: > ..... > # _3 = PHI <_17(7), -1(2)> > bb43: > return _3; > > ARM PROMOTE_MODE changes the sign for integer constants only and hence > looking at the variable with PROMOTE_MODE is not changing the sign in > this case. > > #define PROMOTE_MODE(MODE, UNSIGNEDP, TYPE) \ > if (GET_MODE_CLASS (MODE) == MODE_INT \ > && GET_MODE_SIZE (MODE) < 4) \ > { \ > if (MODE == QImode) \ > UNSIGNEDP = 1; \ > else if (MODE == HImode) \ > UNSIGNEDP = 1; \ > (MODE) = SImode; \ > } Where does it only apply for "constants"? It applies to all QImode and HImode entities. >>> As for the -fno-strict-overflow case, if the variables overflows, in VRP >>> dumps, I see +INF(OVF), but the value range stored in ssa has TYPE_MAX. >>> We therefore should limit the comparison to (TYPE_MIN < VR_MIN && VR_MAX >>> < TYPE_MAX) instead of (TYPE_MIN <= VR_MIN && VR_MAX <= TYPE_MAX) when >>> checking to be sure that this is not the overflowing case. Attached >>> patch changes this. >> >> I don't think that's necessary - the overflow cases happen only when >> that overflow has undefined behavior, thus any valid program will have >> values <= MAX. > > I see that you have now removed +INF(OVF). I will change it this way. I have not removed anything, I just fixed a bug. Richard. > Thanks again, > Kugan >
diff --git a/gcc/calls.c b/gcc/calls.c index a3e6faa..eac512f 100644 --- a/gcc/calls.c +++ b/gcc/calls.c @@ -1484,7 +1484,10 @@ precompute_arguments (int num_actuals, struct arg_data *args) args[i].initial_value = gen_lowpart_SUBREG (mode, args[i].value); SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (args[i].initial_value) = 1; - SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET (args[i].initial_value, args[i].unsignedp); + if (is_promoted_for_type (args[i].tree_value, mode, !args[i].unsignedp)) + SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET (args[i].initial_value, SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED); + else + SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET (args[i].initial_value, args[i].unsignedp); } } } diff --git a/gcc/cfgexpand.c b/gcc/cfgexpand.c index b7a34a2..ac6776d 100644 --- a/gcc/cfgexpand.c +++ b/gcc/cfgexpand.c @@ -3309,7 +3309,13 @@ expand_gimple_stmt_1 (gimple stmt) GET_MODE (target), temp, unsignedp); } - convert_move (SUBREG_REG (target), temp, unsignedp); + if ((SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) == SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED) + && (GET_CODE (temp) == SUBREG) + && (GET_MODE (target) == GET_MODE (temp)) + && (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (target)) == GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (temp)))) + emit_move_insn (SUBREG_REG (target), SUBREG_REG (temp)); + else + convert_move (SUBREG_REG (target), temp, unsignedp); } else if (nontemporal && emit_storent_insn (target, temp)) ; diff --git a/gcc/expr.c b/gcc/expr.c index 10f4a96..68708c1 100644 --- a/gcc/expr.c +++ b/gcc/expr.c @@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see #include "tree-ssa-address.h" #include "cfgexpand.h" #include "builtins.h" +#include "tree-ssa.h" #ifndef STACK_PUSH_CODE #ifdef STACK_GROWS_DOWNWARD @@ -9210,6 +9211,88 @@ expand_expr_real_2 (sepops ops, rtx target, enum machine_mode tmode, } #undef REDUCE_BIT_FIELD +/* Return TRUE if value in SSA is already zero/sign extended for lhs type + (type here is the combination of LHS_MODE and LHS_UNS) using value range + information stored. Return FALSE otherwise. */ +bool +is_promoted_for_type (tree ssa, enum machine_mode lhs_mode, bool lhs_uns) +{ + wide_int type_min, type_max; + wide_int min, max, limit; + unsigned int prec; + tree lhs_type; + bool rhs_uns; + gimple stmt; + + if (ssa == NULL_TREE + || TREE_CODE (ssa) != SSA_NAME + || !INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (ssa))) + return false; + + /* Return FALSE if value_range is not recorded for SSA. */ + if (get_range_info (ssa, &min, &max) != VR_RANGE) + return false; + stmt = SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (ssa); + + /* In some architectures, negative integer constants are truncated and + sign changed with target defined PROMOTE_MODE macro. This will impact + the value range seen here and produce wrong code if zero/sign extensions + are eliminated. Therefore, return false if this SSA can have negative + integers. */ + if (is_gimple_assign (stmt) + && (TREE_CODE_CLASS (gimple_assign_rhs_code (stmt)) == tcc_unary)) + { + tree rhs1 = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt); + if (TREE_CODE (rhs1) == INTEGER_CST + && !TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)) + && tree_int_cst_compare (rhs1, integer_zero_node) == -1) + return false; + } + else if (gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_PHI) + { + unsigned int i; + for (i = 0; i < gimple_phi_num_args (stmt); ++i) + { + tree arg = gimple_phi_arg_def (stmt, i); + if (TREE_CODE (arg) == INTEGER_CST + && !TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)) + && tree_int_cst_compare (arg, integer_zero_node) == -1) + return false; + } + } + + lhs_type = lang_hooks.types.type_for_mode (lhs_mode, lhs_uns); + rhs_uns = TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (ssa)); + prec = min.get_precision (); + + /* Signed maximum value. */ + limit = wide_int::from (TYPE_MAX_VALUE (TREE_TYPE (ssa)), prec, SIGNED); + + /* Signedness of LHS and RHS differs but values in range. */ + if ((rhs_uns != lhs_uns) + && ((!lhs_uns && !wi::neg_p (min, TYPE_SIGN (lhs_type))) + || (lhs_uns && (wi::cmp (max, limit, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (ssa))) == -1)))) + lhs_uns = !lhs_uns; + + /* Signedness of LHS and RHS should match. */ + if (rhs_uns != lhs_uns) + return false; + + type_min = wide_int::from (TYPE_MIN_VALUE (lhs_type), prec, + TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (ssa))); + type_max = wide_int::from (TYPE_MAX_VALUE (lhs_type), prec, + TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (ssa))); + + /* Check if values lies in-between the type range. */ + if ((wi::neg_p (max, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (ssa))) + || (wi::cmp (max, type_max, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (ssa))) == -1)) + && (!wi::neg_p (min, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (ssa))) + || (wi::cmp (min, 0, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (ssa))) == 0) + || (wi::cmp (type_min, min, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (ssa))) == -1))) + return true; + + return false; +} /* Return TRUE if expression STMT is suitable for replacement. Never consider memory loads as replaceable, because those don't ever lead @@ -9513,7 +9596,10 @@ expand_expr_real_1 (tree exp, rtx target, enum machine_mode tmode, temp = gen_lowpart_SUBREG (mode, decl_rtl); SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (temp) = 1; - SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET (temp, unsignedp); + if (is_promoted_for_type (ssa_name, mode, !unsignedp)) + SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET (temp, SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED); + else + SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET (temp, unsignedp); return temp; } diff --git a/gcc/expr.h b/gcc/expr.h index 6a1d3ab..e99d000 100644 --- a/gcc/expr.h +++ b/gcc/expr.h @@ -440,6 +440,7 @@ extern rtx expand_expr_real_1 (tree, rtx, enum machine_mode, enum expand_modifier, rtx *, bool); extern rtx expand_expr_real_2 (sepops, rtx, enum machine_mode, enum expand_modifier); +extern bool is_promoted_for_type (tree, enum machine_mode, bool); /* Generate code for computing expression EXP. An rtx for the computed value is returned. The value is never null. diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/zero_sign_ext_test.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/zero_sign_ext_test.c index e69de29..ef37612 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/zero_sign_ext_test.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/zero_sign_ext_test.c @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ +extern void abort (void); + +/* { dg-options "-O2" } */ +/* { dg-do run } */ + +#define TYPE_MAX(type, sign) \ + ((!sign) ? ((1 << (sizeof (type) * 8 - 1)) - 1) : \ + ((1 << (sizeof (type) * 8)) - 1)) +#define TYPE_MIN(type, sign) \ + ((!sign) ? -(1 << (sizeof (type) * 8 - 1)) : 0) + +#define TEST_FN(NAME, ARG_TYPE, RET_TYPE, CAST_TYPE, VAL, VR_MIN, VR_MAX)\ + __attribute__((noinline, noclone)) RET_TYPE \ + NAME (ARG_TYPE arg){ \ + RET_TYPE ret = VAL; \ + if (arg + 1 < VR_MIN || arg + 1 > VR_MAX) return ret; \ + /* Value Range of arg at this point will be [VR_min, VR_max]. */\ + arg = arg + VAL; \ + ret = (CAST_TYPE)arg; \ + return arg; \ + } + +/* Signed to signed conversion with value in-range. */ +TEST_FN (foo1, short, short, char, 1, TYPE_MIN (char, 0), TYPE_MAX (char, 0)); +TEST_FN (foo2, short, short, char, 1, TYPE_MIN (char, 0) + 1,\ + TYPE_MAX (char, 0) - 1); + +/* Signed to signed conversion with value not in-range. */ +TEST_FN (foo3, short, short, char, -1, TYPE_MIN (short, 0) + 1, 100); +TEST_FN (foo4, short, short, char, 1, 12, TYPE_MAX (short, 0) + 1); + +/* Unsigned to unsigned conversion with value in-range. */ +TEST_FN (foo5, unsigned short, unsigned short, unsigned char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (char, 1) + 1, TYPE_MAX (char, 1) - 1); +TEST_FN (foo6, unsigned short, unsigned short, unsigned char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (char, 1), TYPE_MAX (char, 1)); + +/* Unsigned to unsigned conversion with value not in-range. */ +TEST_FN (foo7, unsigned short, unsigned short, unsigned char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (short, 1) + 1, TYPE_MAX (short, 1) - 1); +TEST_FN (foo8, unsigned short, unsigned short, unsigned char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (short, 1), TYPE_MAX (short, 1)); + +/* Signed to unsigned conversion with value range positive. */ +TEST_FN (foo9, short, short, unsigned char, -1, 1,\ + TYPE_MAX (char, 1) - 1); +TEST_FN (foo10, short, short, unsigned char, 1, 0,\ + TYPE_MAX (char, 1)); + +/* Signed to unsigned conversion with value range negative. */ +TEST_FN (foo11, short, short, unsigned char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (char, 0) + 1, TYPE_MAX (char, 0) - 1); +TEST_FN (foo12, short, short, unsigned char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (char, 0), TYPE_MAX (char, 0)); + +/* Unsigned to Signed conversion with value range in signed equiv range */ +TEST_FN (foo13, unsigned short, unsigned short, char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (char, 1) + 1, TYPE_MAX (char, 0) - 1); +TEST_FN (foo14, unsigned short, unsigned short, char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (char, 1), TYPE_MAX (char, 0)); + +/* Unsigned to Signed conversion with value range not-in signed range */ +TEST_FN (foo15, unsigned short, unsigned short, char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (char, 1) + 1, TYPE_MAX (char, 1) - 1); +TEST_FN (foo16, unsigned short, unsigned short, char, 1,\ + TYPE_MIN (char, 1), TYPE_MAX (char, 1)); + +int main () +{ + /* Signed to signed conversion with value in-range. */ + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo1 (-32) != -31) + abort (); + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo2 (32) != 33) + abort (); + + /* Signed to signed conversion with value not in-range. */ + /* arg - 1 */ + if (foo3 (-512) != -513) + abort (); + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo4 (512) != 513) + abort (); + + /* Unsigned to unsigned conversion with value in-range. */ + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo5 (64) != 65) + abort (); + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo6 (64) != 65) + abort (); + + /* Unigned to unsigned conversion with value not in-range. */ + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo7 (512) != 513) + abort (); + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo8 (512) != 513) + abort (); + + /* Signed to unsigned conversion with value range positive. */ + /* arg - 1 */ + if (foo9 (2) != 1) + abort (); + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo10 (2) != 3) + abort (); + + /* Signed to unsigned conversion with value range negative. */ + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo11 (-125) != -124) + abort (); + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo12 (-125) != -124) + abort (); + + /* Unsigned to Signed conversion with value range in signed equiv range */ + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo13 (125) != 126) + abort (); + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo14 (125) != 126) + abort (); + + /* Unsigned to Signed conversion with value range not-in signed range */ + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo15 (250) != 251) + abort (); + /* arg + 1 */ + if (foo16 (250) != 251) + abort (); + + return 0; +}