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: address taken problem

From: Jim Wilson <wilson at tuliptree dot org>
To: Dasarath Weeratunge <dasarath at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:00:01 -0700
Subject: Re: address taken problem
References: <610adb5f0804101216h255e6136ke999233e7d458afc@mail.gmail.com>

Dasarath Weeratunge wrote:

In the following code I marked the tree 'node.0' as address taken using
'c_mark_addressable'. Now in the assembly code, isn't the return value of the
second call to malloc completely discarded?

c_mark_addressable is meant to be called during parsing. It may affect the IL that will be generated, so you can't expect to be able to call it during optimization.

You haven't given us a copy of your patch, or the C code for your testcase. It is difficult to say much definitive when we are lacking detailed info about what you are doing.

Jim

References:
- address taken problem
  - From: Dasarath Weeratunge

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