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: fix c/2035


Richard Henderson wrote:-

> We were rightly rejecting the creation of (subreg:SF (reg:DF x) 0).
> But I see no reason why we can't leave the existing (subreg:DI (reg:DF x) 0)
> intact and use the code farther down to process it.
> 
> As far as I can tell, this problem can only be triggered by invalid
> type-punning on local variables.  I.e.  *(float *)&a_double.  But we
> shouldn't crash either.
> 
> r~
> 
>         * expmed.c (extract_bit_field): Fall through to generic code rather
>         than aborting on subreg special case.

store_bit_field has similar logic in two places; should they be changed
too?

Neil.


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