[Bug tree-optimization/2462] "restrict" implementation bug

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-13 11:28 ---
We have a separate bug for malloced memory. So this bug is FIXED.


-- 

steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2462

[Bug tree-optimization/2462] "restrict" implementation bug

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-13 11:12 
---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Restrict has been implemented anew for GCC 4.6.  Does that fix this bug?

In 4.5, see comment #7 for the status of this bug.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2462

[Bug tree-optimization/2462] "restrict" implementation bug

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-13 10:48 ---
Restrict has been implemented anew for GCC 4.6.  Does that fix this bug?


-- 

steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |WAITING


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2462

[Bug tree-optimization/2462] "restrict" implementation bug

[dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu]

--- Comment #8 from dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu  2009-06-25 
15:31 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> With the new restrict implementation baz() works and all the rest would work
> as well if the calls to link_error () would not cause the malloced memory
> to be clobbered.  The artifact here is that malloced memory is considered
> global (we are not allowed to remove stores to it).

The intention for link_error was to just make it easier to write a test, not to
prohibit optimization.
Please feel free to adjust the code accordingly.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2462

[Bug tree-optimization/2462] "restrict" implementation bug

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-06-25 10:28 ---
With the new restrict implementation baz() works and all the rest would work
as well if the calls to link_error () would not cause the malloced memory
to be clobbered.  The artifact here is that malloced memory is considered
global (we are not allowed to remove stores to it).

But this is all unrelated to restrict support which should be properly
fixed now.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2462

[Bug tree-optimization/2462] "restrict" implementation bug

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com  2009-06-25 08:58 ---
Oops...


-- 

ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||missed-optimization


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2462

[Bug tree-optimization/2462] "restrict" implementation bug

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-05-22 02:09 ---
pointer plus branch helps out with the heap allocated memory, may_alias gets
less confused with them.  It does not fully fix this bug but it does help out.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2462