This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug rtl-optimization/43494] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Overlooked dependency causes wrong scheduling, wrong code
- From: "steven at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 21 Jul 2010 09:33:42 -0000
- Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/43494] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Overlooked dependency causes wrong scheduling, wrong code
- References: <bug-43494-578@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #19 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-21 09:33 -------
x_addr is a VALUE that has no locs:
Breakpoint 4, true_dependence (mem=0x20000000005ddf68, mem_mode=VOIDmode,
x=0x20000000005ddfb0, varies=0x2000000000496720) at
../../trunk/gcc/alias.c:2330
2330 if (MEM_VOLATILE_P (x) && MEM_VOLATILE_P (mem))
(gdb) cont
Continuing.
Breakpoint 11, get_addr (x=0x6000000000316e28) at ../../trunk/gcc/alias.c:1726
1726 if (GET_CODE (x) != VALUE)
(gdb) up
#1 0x400000000036eb50 in true_dependence (mem=0x20000000005ddf68,
mem_mode=SImode, x=0x20000000005ddfb0, varies=0x2000000000496720) at
../../trunk/gcc/alias.c:2367
2367 x_addr = get_addr (x_addr);
(gdb) down
#0 get_addr (x=0x6000000000316e28) at ../../trunk/gcc/alias.c:1726
1726 if (GET_CODE (x) != VALUE)
(gdb) next
1728 v = CSELIB_VAL_PTR (x);
(gdb)
1729 if (v)
(gdb)
1731 for (l = v->locs; l; l = l->next)
(gdb) p v->locs
$72 = (struct elt_loc_list *) 0x0
(gdb) p debug_rtx(x)
(value:DI 10:10 @0x6000000000316e28/0x6000000000316d10)
$73 = void
(gdb)
So get_addr just returns the VALUE.
Is it *ever* OK for get_addr to return a VALUE rtx? It seems to me this should
never happen, and we should assert that.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494