[Bug target/44903] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c execution test

["rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-11 22:04 -------
(In reply to comment #9)
> Subject: Re:  [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c execution test
> 
> > The above testcase worked?  Not the pr35258.c, but the one I gave, with
> > the int aligned(1)?  The difference on the 4.5 branch is that we left the
> > memcpy call alone and did not inline-expand it on the tree level.
> 
> The above testcase doesn't work with 4.5 and I doubt it ever worked on
> PA.  The pointer passed to foo is used as is.  It's only the memcpy special
> case that is handled by 4.5 and earlier.

On i?86 we get correct 1-byte alignment for the pointer access while on
my ia64-cross the MEM has 4-byte alignment which is wrong.  t is properly
1-byte aligned (and pointer-to packed structs for example will work only
because there's a handled_component_ref around the pointer dereference).

> > I am trying to say that we hit a latent bug here, and that it's finally time
> > to fix it (but I don't easily see how to do that in the most efficient way).
> 
> Dave
> 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44903