--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-12 19:01 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-12 19:00 ---
Subject: Bug 38865
Author: pinskia
Date: Fri Jun 12 19:00:39 2009
New Revision: 148437
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148437
Log:
2009-06-12 Andrew Pinski
PR tree-opt/38865
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 18:59 ---
Here is another testcase but this time without -> :
struct s { int i; };
void g(struct s *);
float a (void)
{
struct s sv;
sv.i = 0;
int d = sv.i;
float d1 = *(float*)&d;
g(&sv);
return d1;
}
float a1 (vo
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 18:55 ---
>If you wouldn't generate a V_C_E for *(float*)&sv->i it would just work.
The front-end generates them for the vector testcase which is why I added that
one to show that forwprop does not matter in the end.
--
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-01-16 09:36 ---
Subject: Re: missing FRE with
VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 02:33
> ---
> Mine. Simple patch whic
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 09:27 ---
If you wouldn't generate a V_C_E for *(float*)&sv->i it would just work.
IMHO this should be invalid gimple anyway, as you V_C_E a register type but
the V_C_E argument is not a register. Thus valid gimple would be
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 02:33 ---
Mine. Simple patch which implements it in vn_reference_lookup, Since VCE is
both a reference and really a bit-wise cast, we can do the normal lookup and
then do a lookup if the VCE was not there. I have not seen if
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-15 23:40 ---
Note with the disabling of VCE creation for *(float*)&sv->i after this bug has
been fixed, there is a possibility that -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing could get
slightly better code than -O2 :).
--
pinskia at gcc dot gn
