Skip to content

[release/10.0] JIT: bail from optOptimizeBoolsCondBlock on GTF_UNSIGNED inputs#128960

Open
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
release/10.0from
backport/pr-128928-to-release/10.0
Open

[release/10.0] JIT: bail from optOptimizeBoolsCondBlock on GTF_UNSIGNED inputs#128960
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
release/10.0from
backport/pr-128928-to-release/10.0

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions Bot commented Jun 3, 2026

Backport of #128928 to release/10.0

/cc @AndyAyersMS

Customer Impact

  • Customer reported
  • Found internally

Reported in #128895. Impacts a shipping app.

Regression

  • Yes
  • No

Regression from .NET 8/9 (though the introducing change #78786 was also in .NET 8, but apparently not easily reachable).

Testing

Created independent repro based on customer's report. Developed fix and shared with customer, who validated it on their app. Local testing (SPMI, etc) revealed no diffs.

Risk

Low. Disables an optimization.

optOptimizeBoolsCondBlock folds pairs of BBJ_COND blocks of the form
"(x == 0) || (x relop 0)" into a single directional comparison.

Mirror the existing check at the (LT,LT)/(LT,GE) folds and bail out
if either input is unsigned.

Possible a fix for #128895.

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 3, 2026
@dotnet-policy-service
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT, @jakobbotsch
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

@JulieLeeMSFT JulieLeeMSFT added the Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review label Jun 3, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants