This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Incorrect bitfield aliasing with Tree SSA

From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
To: "Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Richard Kenner" <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>, anemet at caviumnetworks dot com
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 10:07:43 +0200
Subject: Re: Incorrect bitfield aliasing with Tree SSA
References: <18034.48960.772642.116034@localhost.localdomain> <10706170149.AA05578@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <4aca3dc20706162034x3a454b97j84ad71810c53f982@mail.gmail.com>

> > So if I have
> >         struct foo {int x; float y; } bar;
> >         int *pi;
> >         float *pf;
> >
> > and mark X as "nonaddressable", I know that an assigment to *pi can't
> > affect bar.x.
>
> But if you add
>
> struct foo *foop = &bar.
>
> foop->x = 5.
>
> It can, even though we *claim* X is nonaddressable.

Which can what exactly?

-- 
Eric Botcazou

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Incorrect bitfield aliasing with Tree SSA
  - From: Daniel Berlin

References:
- Incorrect bitfield aliasing with Tree SSA
  - From: Adam Nemet
- Re: Incorrect bitfield aliasing with Tree SSA
  - From: Richard Kenner
- Re: Incorrect bitfield aliasing with Tree SSA
  - From: Daniel Berlin

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