[PATCH 2/5] completely_scalarize arrays as well as records.

Alan Lawrence alan.lawrence@arm.com
Mon Sep 14 17:41:00 GMT 2015


Ping. (Rerevert with 5 lines extra paranoia in scalarizable_type_p).

Thanks, Alan

On 08/09/15 13:43, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 02:15:45PM +0100, Alan Lawrence wrote:
>> In-Reply-To: <55E0697D.2010008@arm.com>
>>
>> On 28/08/15 16:08, Alan Lawrence wrote:
>>> Alan Lawrence wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Right. I think VLA's are the problem with pr64312.C also. I'm testing a fix
>>>> (that declares arrays with any of these properties as unscalarizable).
>>> ...
>>> In the meantime I've reverted the patch pending further testing on x86, aarch64
>>> and arm.
>>
>> I've now tested g++ and fortran (+ bootstrap + check-gcc) on x86, AArch64 and
>> ARM, and Ada on x86 and ARM.
>>
>> So far the list of failures from the original patch seems to be:
>>
>> * g++.dg/torture/pr64312.C on ARM and m68k-linux
>> * Building Ada on x86
>> * Ada ACATS c87b31a on ARM (where the Ada frontend builds fine)
>>
>> Here's a new version, that fixes all the above, by adding a dose of
>> paranoia in scalarizable_type_p...
>
> I have only had a bref look at scalarizable_type_p then, considering
> all of the rest unchanged, and the tests there seem natural to me.
> (Note that I do not have the authority to approve the patch.)
>
>> (I wonder about adding a comment
>> in completely_scalarize that such cases have already been ruled
>> out?)
>
> The comment already references scalarizable_type_p which is enough at
> least for me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Martin
>



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list