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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [patch fortran] Fix PR 30865

From: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
To: Thomas Koenig <Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:38:26 +0100
Subject: Re: [patch fortran] Fix PR 30865
References: <20070224220754.GA6319@meiner.onlinehome.de> <84fc9c000702270548y55c66c93vd40232b9586be17e@mail.gmail.com> <20070227192826.GA3083@meiner.onlinehome.de>

Hi,

Thomas Koenig schrieb:
>> The new test fails for me on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu at all
>> optimization levels.
>>     
> I don't have a 64-bit system to test this on.  Can you send
> me the -fdump-tree-original file for the test case (or attach
> it to the PR)?
>   
I don't think it has anything to do with 64-bit systems. The GIMPLE tree
looks as follows (it is a bit clearer than the original tree, but they
are very similar):

    D.1402 = *opt1;
    D.1403 = (int8) D.1402;
    D.1378 = &D.1403 != 0B;
    if (D.1378)

The comparison should be  "D.1403 != 0B" not "&D.1403 != 0B;". The
latter is always true.

Tobias

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch fortran] Fix PR 30865
  - From: Tobias Burnus

References:
- [patch fortran] Fix PR 30865
  - From: Thomas Koenig
- Re: [patch fortran] Fix PR 30865
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [patch fortran] Fix PR 30865
  - From: Thomas Koenig

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