This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug regression/49572] [4.4 Regression]: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20030709-2.c scan-tree-dump-times cddce2 ".rtmem" 0
- From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 10:43:16 +0000
- Subject: [Bug regression/49572] [4.4 Regression]: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20030709-2.c scan-tree-dump-times cddce2 ".rtmem" 0
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-49572-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49572
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-06-30 10:42:21 UTC ---
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49572
>
> --- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-30 10:30:28 UTC ---
> > For loads yes.
>
> OK, what's the right predicate to use on the RHS here? !is_gimple_val?
Do we ever end up with stores in that function? I doubt so given
that expr->ops.single.rhs is set to RHS1. ISTR DOM enters a load
for a store operation. So just unconditionally use the type
of rhs1.