Ugh, yeah. I suppose PTA assigned a HEAP var as pointed-to object for the
original pointer, even if the transformed stmt
orig_ptr_1 = a;
has the points-to information preserved for orig_ptr_1 further propagation
of a will make accesses through orig_ptr_1 have different alias
properties.
I tried to implement the approach you describe above in attached patch.
Thanks a lot, this indeed fixes the problem!
Currently testing on x86_64.
Please also install the testcase I posted in the other message in conjunction
with the fix. Thanks in advance.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/25/2011 10:57 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
wrote:
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an
updated testcase which I will sent out individually.
On 09/26/2011 12:29 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/25/2011 10:57 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
wrote:
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an
updated
How about attached (untested) patch implementing a conservative, but
runtime-efficient approach?
This doesn't work. My understanding is that you need to recompute far more
than that, in particular the points-to information for _all_ the calls in the
function. I don't know enough of the
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an
updated testcase which I will sent out individually.
Patch set was bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
- Tom
On 09/25/2011 10:57 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an
updated testcase which I will sent out individually.
Patch set was bootstrapped and reg-tested on
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an
updated testcase which I will sent out individually.
Patch set was bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
- Tom
2011-07-30 Tom de Vries t...@codesourcery.com
PR middle-end/43513
*
On 09/24/2011 05:29 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an
updated testcase which I will sent out individually.
Patch set was bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
- Tom
2011-07-30 Tom de Vries
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Tom de Vries vr...@codesourcery.com wrote:
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an updated
testcase which I will sent out individually.
Patch set was bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
- Tom
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Tom de Vries vr...@codesourcery.com wrote:
Hi Richard,
On 07/30/2011 09:21 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an updated
testcase which I will sent out individually.
Patch set was bootstrapped and
Hi Richard,
On 07/30/2011 09:21 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an updated
testcase which I will sent out individually.
Patch set was bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
Ok for trunk?
You already approved the the 2 new
On 07/30/2011 09:21 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
On 07/28/2011 08:20 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 06:25 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011
Hi,
On 07/28/2011 08:20 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 06:25 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 05:27 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul
On 07/30/2011 10:21 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
On 07/28/2011 08:20 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 06:25 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011
On 07/30/2011 10:21 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
On 07/28/2011 08:20 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 06:25 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Tom de Vries vr...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 07/30/2011 10:21 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
On 07/28/2011 08:20 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 06:25 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Tom de Vries vr...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 07/30/2011 10:21 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
On 07/28/2011 08:20 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 06:25 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 05:27 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 02:12 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 01:50
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Michael Matz wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
I don't think it is safe to try to get at the VLA type the way you do.
I don't understand in what way it's not safe. Do you mean I don't manage
to find
the type always, or that I find
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 05:27 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 02:12 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 01:50 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi Richard,
I
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 05:27 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 02:12 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul
On 07/28/2011 06:25 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 05:27 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 02:12
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Tom de Vries vr...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 07/28/2011 06:25 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 05:27 PM, Richard
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 02:12 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 07/27/2011 01:50 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi Richard,
I have a patch set for bug 43513 - The stack pointer is adjusted twice.
01_pr43513.3.patch
Hi,
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
I don't think it is safe to try to get at the VLA type the way you do.
I don't understand in what way it's not safe. Do you mean I don't manage to
find
the type always, or that I find the wrong type, or something else?
I think you
26 matches
Mail list logo
