https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113597
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #57214|0 |1
is obsolete| |
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 57252
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57252&action=edit
prototype fix
Note when I extended the patch to also cover a PARM_DECL base to extent
coverage I see
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr70421.c -O1 execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr70421.c -O2 execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr70421.c -O3 -g execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr70421.c -Os execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr70421.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin
-flto-partitio
n=none execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr70421.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin
-fno-fat-lto-obje
cts execution test
on x86_64. It seems that arg_base_value isn't the correct thing to use
but it eventually should have been unique_base_value (UNIQUE_BASE_VALUE_ARGP)?
I'm not sure whether all the different unique base values mean we'll not
be able to derive exactly those classes from MEM_EXPRs.
