This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix the one entry mem{{,p}cpy,move,set} optimization aliasing issues (PR middle-end/29272)
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 11:31:02 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix the one entry mem{{,p}cpy,move,set} optimization aliasing issues (PR middle-end/29272)
- References: <20060929075035.GQ20982@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <451D5AEA.4040401@codesourcery.com> <20061004102434.GR20982@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <4529E262.2050505@codesourcery.com>
On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > Here is an updated patch even with the testcase. As long as &p->t is not
> > considered an access to *p nor p->t (from Joseph's
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-11/msg00978.html
> > mail I gather that it is unclear in the standard, but both common sense
> > and that mail suggests that &p->t is more likely not considered an access
> > to *p nor p->t), I believe the testcase is valid.
>
> I would like Joseph's opinion on the testcase. Joseph, do you believe this
> should be a valid program? I say "should", because I recognize that the
> standard doesn't necessarily clearly define this case.
I think this should be valid.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com