This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Problem with nested functions, aliasing, ssa rewriting, etc
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: dnovillo at redhat dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:49:23 -0700
- Subject: Re: Problem with nested functions, aliasing, ssa rewriting, etc
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <20040310215246.GA2798@redhat.com>, Richard Henderson writes:
>On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:44:18AM -0700, email@example.com wrote:
>> CHAIN.1_2->p = &CHAIN.1->buffer;
>The problem here is that this used to be "&buffer", which
>had the TREE_INVARANT bit set. Failing to clear that meant
>that we incorrectly treated the entire rhs as min_invariant.
>Fixed thus. I'll put this through the testsuite momentarily.
>Also noticed a problem in note_addressable where we'd consider
>to address X, when this is in fact a normal use. Any use of
>get_base_decl should be viewed with suspicion...
Funny. I had noticed that as well while looking at this problem. I had
put it on my todo list since it didn't appear to directly influence the
correctness of the testcase I was looking at.