[Bug tree-optimization/50698] pretending to create versioning for alias when not required
rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Wed Oct 12 11:32:00 GMT 2011
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50698
Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |alias, missed-optimization
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2011-10-12
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-12 11:31:56 UTC ---
Confirmed:
14: versioning for alias required: can't determine dependence between
*D.2220_26 and *D.2221_25
14: mark for run-time aliasing test between *D.2220_26 and *D.2221_25
D.2222_24 = D.2223_23 * 4;
D.2221_25 = &mem + D.2222_24;
D.2220_26 = &MEM[(void *)&mem + 4096B] + D.2222_24;
... = *D.2220_26;
*D.2221_25 = ...;
(res = {(float *) &MEM[(void *)&mem + 4096B], +, 4}_1))
base_address: &MEM[(void *)&mem + 4096B]
offset from base address: 0
constant offset from base address: 0
step: 4
aligned to: 128
base_object: *(float *) &MEM[(void *)&mem + 4096B]
Access function 0: {0B, +, 4}_1
vs.
(res = {(float *) &mem, +, 4}_1))
base_address: &mem
offset from base address: 0
constant offset from base address: 0
step: 4
aligned to: 128
base_object: *(float *) &mem
Access function 0: {0B, +, 4}_1
I will have a look.
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list