This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: alias.c:nonoverlapping_component_refs_p



On Monday, December 3, 2001, at 08:50 , Richard Henderson wrote:

> At the same place, I also note that we can derive some information
> if we make some assumptions about which bits insert/extract_bit_field
> will touch for a given field.  For instance, it's unlikely that a
> bit at position 0 will be manipulated concurrently with a bit at
> position 1000, and in general I'd suspect (but don't know for sure)
> that we could bound the check by bit_position/bits_per_word being
> equal.

At some day we may well decide to use 128-bit vector registers for
operating on fields of a packed struct, if the struct has proper
alignment. So the bound should depend on the known alignment and
the widest mode that can be used for that alignment.

   -Geert


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]