https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
--- Comment #55 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On July 17, 2014 6:13:14 PM CEST, "thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320 > >--- Comment #53 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org --- >(In reply to thopre01 from comment #52) >> (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #51) >> > >> > TARGET_MEM_REF is supposed to be a valid memory access for the >target though >> > and, by definition, an unaligned access is not valid for a strict >alignment >> > target (unless you have a movmisalign pattern), so the problem is >the >> > TARGET_MEM_REF. >> >> So we just need to identify what changes the MEM_REF that bswap >introduce >> into a TARGET_MEM_REF without taking alignment into account. >> >> After bswap it's only a MEM_REF: >> >> load_dst_215 = MEM[(unsigned char *)load_src_277]; > >So it changes from a MEM_REF to a TARGET_MEM_REF in ivopts from a quick >grep. I >don't know how much this system but I can take a look after Cauldron >where does >this happen and bring the right person into this discussion. You need to fix may_be_unaligned (or similar) in ivopts.
