[Bug middle-end/39932] [4.5 Regression] Revision 146831 caused many test failures

[rguenther at suse dot de]

------- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de  2009-04-28 21:35 -------
Subject: Re:  [4.5 Regression] Revision 146831 caused
 many test failures

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, sje at cup dot hp dot com wrote:

> ------- Comment #6 from sje at cup dot hp dot com  2009-04-28 21:25 -------
> ;; Function foo (foo)
> 
> foo ()
> {
>   vector float D.2002;
>   vector float D.2001;
>   vector float D.2000;
>   vector float D.1999;
>   vector float D.1998;
>   vector float D.1997;
>   v4sf value.1;
>   v4sf value.0;
> <bb 2>:
>   value.0_2 = value;
>   D.1997_3 = BIT_FIELD_REF <{ 1.0e+9, 1.0e+9, 1.0e+9, 1.0e+9 }, 64, 0>;
>   D.1998_4 = BIT_FIELD_REF <value.0_2, 64, 0>;
>   D.1999_5 = D.1997_3 + D.1998_4;
>   D.2000_6 = BIT_FIELD_REF <{ 1.0e+9, 1.0e+9, 1.0e+9, 1.0e+9 }, 64, 64>;
>   D.2001_7 = BIT_FIELD_REF <value.0_2, 64, 64>;
>   D.2002_8 = D.2000_6 + D.2001_7;
>   value.1_9 = {D.1999_5, D.2002_8};
>   value = value.1_9;
>   return;

That looks all odd.  vector float is supposedly v2sf here.  Especially
the definition of value.1_9 looks odd.

I suppose this is our generic vector support at work?

Richard.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39932