From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-212849-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 1651 invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2007 12:23:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 1618 invoked by uid 48); 12 Mar 2007 12:22:58 -0000
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 12:23:00 -0000
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/31146]  New: forwprop does not look through casts
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
Message-ID: <bug-31146-10053@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
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
X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg01047.txt.bz2

The following two testcases should produce the same code after forwprop1:

struct foo { int i[3]; };

void bar (void)
{
  struct foo Foo;
  int i;

  for (i=0; i<3; ++i)
    {
      void *p = &Foo.i[i];
      int *pi = (int *)p;
      if (pi != 0)
        {
          *pi = 0;
        }
    }
}

---

struct foo { int i[3]; };

void bar (void)
{
  struct foo Foo;
  int i;

  for (i=0; i<3; ++i)
    {
      void *p = &Foo.i[i];
      int *pi = (int *)p;
      if (p != 0)
        {
          *pi = 0;
        }
    }
}


(the difference is testing p != 0 vs. pi != 0)

This happens in tramp3d-v4 via placement new:

  for (i=0; i<3; ++i)
    new (&a[i]) double;

where placement new expands to the "wrong" test sequence.

Mine.


-- 
           Summary: forwprop does not look through casts
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.3.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: missed-optimization
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P3
         Component: tree-optimization
        AssignedTo: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31146