http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42834
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vegorov at
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-01 08:49 ---
Subject: Bug 42834
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jul 1 08:49:19 2010
New Revision: 161655
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161655
Log:
2010-07-01 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-01 09:00 ---
Fixed for 4.6. Measures are in place to avoid the situation on the branches.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-21 11:18 ---
Subject: Bug 42834
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jun 21 11:18:26 2010
New Revision: 161067
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161067
Log:
2010-06-21 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-22 12:29 ---
/* With memcpy, it is possible to bypass aliasing rules, so without
this check i.e. execute/20060930-2.c would be misoptimized,
because it use conflicting alias set to hold
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-22 12:36 ---
Another possible way is to have a block-copy operation in gimple that
would do the copy with alias-set zero and avoids the address-taking.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42834
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 17:09 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
