From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29409 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2009 16:41:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 29177 invoked by uid 48); 21 Jan 2009 16:41:37 -0000 Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:41:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090121164137.29171.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/38921] [4.3 Regression] NULL access in delay-slot In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg02289.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #6 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 16:41 ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Zdenek, could you please comment on comment #3? > Adding MTP_AFTER_MOVE seems like the right thing to do; after all, even the comments for may_trap_or_fault_p specify that it should behave the same way as may_trap_after_code_motion_p (except for also looking for misaligned memory references). However, I suspect that all the places that use may_trap_after_code_motion_p in fact expect it to have MTP_AFTER_MOVE | MTP_UNALIGNED_MEMS semantics as well. So I would propose to merge may_trap_or_fault_p and may_trap_after_code_motion_p to one function (and replace the checks for MTP_UNALIGNED_MEMS in may_trap_p_1 by MTP_AFTER_MOVE, as they IMHO handle different instances of the same problem -- the code that does not fail at its current location, but may fail elsewhere). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38921