On 4/18/23 18:40, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
I will push this when a final round of testing finishes on x86-64 Linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* value-range.h (Value_Range::Value_Range): Avoid pointer sharing.
---
gcc/value-range.h | 13 -
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/value-range.h b/gcc/value-range.h
index 0eeea79b322..f97596cdd14 100644
--- a/gcc/value-range.h
+++ b/gcc/value-range.h
@@ -583,7 +583,18 @@ Value_Range::Value_Range (tree min, tree max,
value_range_kind kind)
inline
Value_Range::Value_Range (const Value_Range )
{
- m_vrange = r.m_vrange;
+ if (r.m_vrange == _irange)
+{
+ m_irange = r.m_irange;
+ m_vrange = _irange;
+}
+ else if (r.m_vrange == _frange)
+{
+ m_frange = r.m_frange;
+ m_vrange = _frange;
+}
+ else
+m_vrange = _unsupported;
}
// Initialize object so it is possible to store temporaries of TYPE
Upon further thought I realized operator= will do all the right things,
and makes the code easier to read.
Re-tested and pushed.From fc03caa0c94c9c11e0c1b1f7e7eba64233dbcfec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aldy Hernandez
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 13:53:15 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fix pointer sharing in Value_Range constructor.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* value-range.h (Value_Range::Value_Range): Avoid pointer sharing.
---
gcc/value-range.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/value-range.h b/gcc/value-range.h
index 0eeea79b322..33ef3b5b8d8 100644
--- a/gcc/value-range.h
+++ b/gcc/value-range.h
@@ -583,7 +583,7 @@ Value_Range::Value_Range (tree min, tree max, value_range_kind kind)
inline
Value_Range::Value_Range (const Value_Range )
{
- m_vrange = r.m_vrange;
+ *this = *r.m_vrange;
}
// Initialize object so it is possible to store temporaries of TYPE
--
2.40.0
