------- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-06-21 08:48 -------
Subject: Re: ICE: fold check: original tree changed
by fold with --enable-checking=fold
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, spop at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
>
> ------- Comment #23 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 08:21 -------
> Subject: Re: ICE: fold check: original tree changed by fold with
> --enable-checking=fold
>
> On 6/21/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The fold_binary change looks unnecessary.
>
> ok.
>
> > The rest is ok.
> >
>
> There was something wrong in the rest, so I'm proposing this fix instead,
> as we were not using the modified base anymore for building the result 't'.
>
> @@ -14191,14 +14220,15 @@ build_fold_addr_expr_with_type (tree t,
> }
> else
> {
> - tree base = t;
> + tree copy_t = copy_node (t);
> + tree base = copy_t;
>
> while (handled_component_p (base))
> base = TREE_OPERAND (base, 0);
> if (DECL_P (base))
> TREE_ADDRESSABLE (base) = 1;
>
> - t = build1 (ADDR_EXPR, ptrtype, t);
> + t = build1 (ADDR_EXPR, ptrtype, copy_t);
> }
>
> return t;
Oh, indeed. The above is ok. (The fold_binary change still looks
unnecessary)
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20623
