PR middle-end/51472: handle TM memmove with non-addressable destinations

Richard Guenther richard.guenther@gmail.com
Thu Jan 5 15:36:00 GMT 2012


On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> You want is_gimple_reg () instead of is_gimple_non_addressable () as you
>> can't simply make something addressable at this point.
>> is_gimple_non_addressable
>> looks like a weird redundant predicate to me - it's only used once and its
>> use
>> should be replaced (and the predicate removed).
>
>
> Ok, thanks.  I am testing a patch changing my original patch, and cleaning
> up the other use of is_gimple_non_addressable.

... which is btw a bit weird and probably not easy to change at this point
(a check would be !is_gimple_reg () && !TREE_ADDRESSABLE (), but
during gimplification we make more things addressable, so that isn't really
a good predicate).  So please at most inline it into its single caller.

Thanks,
Richard.



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list