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]

Re: Uninitialized memory access in final.c


On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Richard Henderson wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 03:45:03PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > Is it ever valid for an insn's length to be increased during
> > shorten_branches?  It seems to me that this would cause the
> > algorithm to be no longer guaranteed to terminate.
> 
> I thought we started with smallest lengths and always expanded.
> Otherwise you wouldn't find the minimal solution.

That's certainly not what the sh backend appears to be doing.
I put in an abort for this case and it triggered for the testcase
that I was debugging, but apparently for nothing else.


Bernd


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