From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-149718-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 31785 invoked by alias); 9 Jul 2005 17:58:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 31752 invoked by uid 48); 9 Jul 2005 17:58:06 -0000
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 18:01:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20050709175806.31751.qmail@sourceware.org>
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <20050706093241.22321.paul.woegerer@nsc.com>
References: <20050706093241.22321.paul.woegerer@nsc.com>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/22321] [4.0/4.1 Regression] &volatile_var != &volatile_var is always true
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg01141.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>


------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-09 17:58 -------
This fails also at -O0:
volatile int x;

int main()
{
  if (&x != &x)
   abort ();
  return 0;
}

And this testcase worked in 3.4.x too so this is defintely a fold bug.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|tree-optimization           |middle-end
            Summary|[4.0/4.1 Regression] Wrong  |[4.0/4.1 Regression]
                   |code with SSA dominator     |&volatile_var !=
                   |optimizations               |&volatile_var is always true


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22321