https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56139
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|tree-optimization |ipa
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Keywords| |deferred
Known to fail| |4.7.1
Severity|enhancement |normal
CC| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|unmodified static data |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
|could go in .rodata, not |unmodified static data
|.data |could go in .rodata, not
| |.data
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We do handle:
static int x[] = {1, 2, 3, 4};
void bar (int x);
int func(int i)
{
bar(x[i]);
return 0;
}
Just fine. It is the IR of the other case where we mess up. And it looks like
it is a regression too. I suspect it is because we used to be able to create
back the ARARY_REF in GCC 4.6.x and that was removed in GCC 4.7 as it caused
other issues.
