On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 09:10:53PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
The inlininer likes to recreate some MEM_REF, it copies most of the
bits (TREE_THIS_NOTRAP, TREE_THIS_VOLATILE, etc.) but forgets about
TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS. This causes the strlen optimization to think the
memory store does not
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 09:10:53PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
The inlininer likes to recreate some MEM_REF, it copies most of the
bits (TREE_THIS_NOTRAP, TREE_THIS_VOLATILE, etc.) but forgets about
TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS.
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 12:50:44AM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
Patch preapproved, but you've attached a different patch.
Sorry about that. Here is the correct one.
Also is this ok for the 4.7 branch?
Yes, thanks.
--- tree-inline.c (revision 191004)
+++ tree-inline.c (working
Hi,
The problem here is the strlen optimization tries to remove a null
character store as we already have done it but it does it for a
volatile store which is not a valid thing to do.
This patch fixes the problem by ignoring statements which have
volatile operands.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 02:10:03PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
The problem here is the strlen optimization tries to remove a null
character store as we already have done it but it does it for a
volatile store which is not a valid thing to do.
This patch fixes the problem by ignoring
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 02:10:03PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
The problem here is the strlen optimization tries to remove a null
character store as we already have done it but it does it for a
volatile store which is not
Hi,
The inlininer likes to recreate some MEM_REF, it copies most of the
bits (TREE_THIS_NOTRAP, TREE_THIS_VOLATILE, etc.) but forgets about
TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS. This causes the strlen optimization to think the
memory store does not have a side effects.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on
