| Message ID | 1344561084.18792.11.camel@gnopaine |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, 9 Aug 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote: > Fix a thinko in strength reduction. I was checking the type of the > wrong operand to determine whether address arithmetic should be used in > replacing expressions. This produced a spurious POINTER_PLUS_EXPR when > an address was converted to an unsigned long and back again. > > Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu with no new > regressions. Ok for trunk? Ok. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Bill > > > gcc: > > 2012-08-09 Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > PR middle-end/54211 > * gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c (analyze_candidates_and_replace): > Use cand_type to determine whether pointer arithmetic will be generated. > > gcc/testsuite: > > 2012-08-09 Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > PR middle-end/54211 > * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr54211.c: New test. > > > Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr54211.c > =================================================================== > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr54211.c (revision 0) > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr54211.c (revision 0) > @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-Os" } */ > + > +int a, b; > +unsigned char e; > +void fn1 () > +{ > + unsigned char *c=0; > + for (;; a++) > + { > + unsigned char d = *(c + b); > + for (; &e<&d; c++) > + goto Found_Top; > + } > +Found_Top: > + if (0) > + goto Empty_Bitmap; > + for (;; a++) > + { > + unsigned char *e = c + b; > + for (; c < e; c++) > + goto Found_Bottom; > + c -= b; > + } > +Found_Bottom: > +Empty_Bitmap: > + ; > +} > Index: gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c > =================================================================== > --- gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c (revision 190260) > +++ gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c (working copy) > @@ -2534,7 +2534,7 @@ analyze_candidates_and_replace (void) > /* Determine whether we'll be generating pointer arithmetic > when replacing candidates. */ > address_arithmetic_p = (c->kind == CAND_ADD > - && POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (c->base_expr))); > + && POINTER_TYPE_P (c->cand_type)); > > /* If all candidates have already been replaced under other > interpretations, nothing remains to be done. */ > > >
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr54211.c =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr54211.c (revision 0) +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr54211.c (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "-Os" } */ + +int a, b; +unsigned char e; +void fn1 () +{ + unsigned char *c=0; + for (;; a++) + { + unsigned char d = *(c + b); + for (; &e<&d; c++) + goto Found_Top; + } +Found_Top: + if (0) + goto Empty_Bitmap; + for (;; a++) + { + unsigned char *e = c + b; + for (; c < e; c++) + goto Found_Bottom; + c -= b; + } +Found_Bottom: +Empty_Bitmap: + ; +} Index: gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c =================================================================== --- gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c (revision 190260) +++ gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c (working copy) @@ -2534,7 +2534,7 @@ analyze_candidates_and_replace (void) /* Determine whether we'll be generating pointer arithmetic when replacing candidates. */ address_arithmetic_p = (c->kind == CAND_ADD - && POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (c->base_expr))); + && POINTER_TYPE_P (c->cand_type)); /* If all candidates have already been replaced under other interpretations, nothing remains to be done. */