public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/49279] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Optimization incorrectly presuming constant variable inside loop in g++ 4.5 and 4.6 with -O2 and -O3 for x86_64 targets
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 15:53:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-49279-4-ura4zgMV3O@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-49279-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-05 15:52:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> with tag coming from allocate_decl_uid (). We would use these copies
> as restrict tag sources using the specified UID. Thus every inline
> copy (and clone) would share them.
Assuming we don't CSE over it (in particular, the LHS of such a builtin with
some non-restricted later pointers not based on it), perhaps it could work.
I wouldn't expose it to users, because how would users ensure uniqueness of the
tag over the whole CU? __COUNTER__ or something similar? That's going to lead
to bugs...
The FEs should probably add that for user __restrict variable initializers too.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-05 15:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-03 21:23 [Bug c++/49279] New: " tcmartins at gmail dot com
2011-06-04 16:37 ` [Bug c++/49279] " hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-06-06 9:06 ` [Bug c++/49279] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-06 13:01 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-06 14:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-08-01 14:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-04 16:48 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49279] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-04 16:59 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-05 8:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-05 9:06 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-05 9:43 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2011-10-05 14:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-05 15:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-05 15:53 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2011-10-06 8:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 8:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 16:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 19:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-07 8:16 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49279] [4.5 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-12 15:27 ` matz at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-03 12:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-03 13:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-03 14:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-49279-4-ura4zgMV3O@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).