Status of the pointer_plus branch

[Andrew_Pinski@PlayStation.Sony.Com]

Hi,
  I am not asking right now to merge this branch to the mainline, I think 
it needs more eyes on the code.  But here is the current status of the 
branch.

It bootstraps and tests on i686-linux-gnu with two regressions.
It builds/tests for spu-elf with two regressions (the same as the x86 
regressions).
I am working on fixing up the bootstrap/tests for 
powerpc64-linux-gnu/powerpc-linux-gnu right now (well the patch was in 
testing but the machine crashed because of the heat in the office).

For i686-linux-gnu, this includes Ada, Java, Fortran, C++, objective-C, 
Objective-C++ and C.  I did not test treelang yet but a quick look through 
the source shows that this language should just work.


The two regressions which exist are:

FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-102.c scan-tree-dump-times possible dependence 
between data-refs 1
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-104.c scan-tree-dump-times possible dependence 
between data-refs 1


This is cause we get "a p+ (b+1)*4" while on the mainline we get a + 
"(((int*)b)*4B + 4B)".
So we don't fold "(b+1)*4" to "b*4 + 4" but I have not looked into why 
yet.

Next week I will be ask Mark Mitchell and the SC about merging this branch 
into the mainline, I should have some benchmark results during that time 
frame also.

To people who are going to test the branch on other targets than the one I 
mentioned already:
Every target's gimplify_va_arg needs to be fixed, likewise for each 
target's va_start, the changes are usually s/PLUS_EXPR/POINTER_PLUS_EXPR 
and make sure the second operand is converted to sizetype (most already 
just use sizetype anyways).


Thanks,
Andrew Pinski