This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[PATCH] Fix find_base_term
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:22:19 +0200
- Subject: [PATCH] Fix find_base_term
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Hi!
The http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg01402.html
patch IMHO broke CONST (PLUS) and CONST (MINUS) handling
in find_base_term. Before that change, the CONST case just
fell through to the PLUS/MINUS (and at that time LO_SUM as well)
case, but now it falls through to the LO_SUM case which just considers
the second operand, not the first (but CONST had a PLUS or MINUS
in it, not LO_SUM). I don't have a testcase that broke because of
this, the bug was found by accident when looking at the function.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for
trunk and 4.4?
2009-04-22 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
* alias.c (find_base_term): Move around LO_SUM case, so that
CONST falls through into PLUS/MINUS handling.
--- gcc/alias.c.jj 2009-04-21 11:16:28.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/alias.c 2009-04-21 12:44:18.000000000 +0200
@@ -1438,15 +1438,16 @@ find_base_term (rtx x)
return x;
return 0;
+ case LO_SUM:
+ /* The standard form is (lo_sum reg sym) so look only at the
+ second operand. */
+ return find_base_term (XEXP (x, 1));
+
case CONST:
x = XEXP (x, 0);
if (GET_CODE (x) != PLUS && GET_CODE (x) != MINUS)
return 0;
/* Fall through. */
- case LO_SUM:
- /* The standard form is (lo_sum reg sym) so look only at the
- second operand. */
- return find_base_term (XEXP (x, 1));
case PLUS:
case MINUS:
{
Jakub