This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: M32C vs PR tree-optimization/39233
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > yes; however, maybe it would be easier to wait till Richard finishes the
> > work on not representing the overflow semantics in types (assuming that's
> > going to happen say in a few weeks?), which should make the fix
> > unnecessary,
>
> Another thought - is this bug in the 4.4 branch? If so, a 4.4 fix may
> be needed too.
Note that the issue is with our representation of POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
which insists on using sizetype for the pointer offset argument
(where I don't remember if m32c uses a bigger or smaller mode for
sizetype than for pointers). Whenever the sizes of the modes for
pointers and sizetype do not match we have a problem.
Note that while this particular issue may likely be fixed with
the no-undefined-overflow branch work the above much general issue
is _not_ fixed by it.
Richard.