https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65270
--- Comment #29 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Thu, 5 Mar 2015, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65270 > > --- Comment #26 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > I completely missed the discussion concerning restrict. I opened PR65330 with > that testcase. We can check in the following way: > Index: ipa-icf.c > =================================================================== > --- ipa-icf.c (revision 221223) > +++ ipa-icf.c (working copy) > @@ -359,6 +359,13 @@ sem_item::compare_cgraph_references ( > return return_false_with_msg > ("references to virtual tables can not be merged"); > > + if (is_a <varpool_node *> (n1) > + && POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (n1->decl)) > + && TYPE_RESTRICT (TREE_TYPE (n1->decl)) > + != TYPE_RESTRICT (TREE_TYPE (n2->decl))) > + return return_false_with_msg > + ("references have different restirct flags"); > + > if (address && n1->equal_address_to (n2) == 1) > return true; > if (!address && n1->semantically_equivalent_p (n2)) > > but I suppose with strong enough restrict handling, we want to actually walk > the type and match restrict flag in all contained pointers? Shall we track it > in PR65330, too? It is a non-bug until the missed optimization is fixed. Yes, let's track it there, too.
