--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 10:31
---
With a cross.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 10:32
---
Looking into it.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-07-08 10:37 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] All 32-bit fortran
execution tests SEGV on SPARC: unaligned access
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-08 12:18 ---
With this short test case:
struct s {
double for_alignment;
struct { int x, y, z; } a[16];
};
void f(struct s *s)
{
unsigned int i;
for (i = 0; i 16; ++i) {
s-a[i].x = 0;
s-a[i].y = 0;
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 12:41 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
With this short test case:
struct s {
double for_alignment;
struct { int x, y, z; } a[16];
};
void f(struct s *s)
{
unsigned int i;
for (i = 0; i 16; ++i) {
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 12:47 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
We end up with
MEM[(struct s *)D.2742_15 + 8B] = 0;
MEM[(struct s *)D.2742_15 + 12B] = 0;
MEM[(struct s *)D.2742_15 + 16B] = 0;
from which set_mem_attributes_minus_bitpos
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 12:50 ---
Still the alternative is probably correct more often. So if that fixes the
issue for you we can go with that until I manage to finish the alignment
tracking.
--
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 13:29
---
Still the alternative is probably correct more often. So if that fixes the
issue for you we can go with that until I manage to finish the alignment
tracking.
Yes, that cannot be worse than the current one.
--- Comment #11 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-08 14:12 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Still the alternative is probably correct more often. So if that fixes the
issue for you we can go with that until I manage to finish the alignment
tracking.
The alternative does fix this
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 20:02
---
Subject: Bug 44843
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Jul 8 20:02:29 2010
New Revision: 161974
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161974
Log:
PR middle-end/44843
* emit-rtl.c
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-07 15:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=21127)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21127action=view)
preprocessed libfortran/io/format.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44843
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-07 15:54 ---
A reghunt identified this patch as the culprit:
2010-07-05 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
* tree.c (reference_alias_ptr_type): New function.
* tree.h (reference_alias_ptr_type): Declare.
*
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44843
13 matches
Mail list logo
