From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-383884-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 30364 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2012 18:01:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 30355 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2012 18:01:16 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:01:03 +0000
From: "jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/51782] -ftree-sra: Missing address-space information leads to wrong
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:52:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: addr-space, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-51782-4-wJjZ4vyNxS@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-51782-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-51782-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
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: 2012-02/txt/msg01818.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782

--- Comment #17 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-17 17:59:43 UTC ---
Created attachment 26695
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26695
Untested proposed fix

This untested patch fixes the issue for me on a cross-compiler.  It
would be great if someone who is set up to run the testsuite on a
platform with multiple address spaces or a simulator of one could test
it a bit.

My plan is to discuss this with maintainers next week and if they like
the approach, give it a formal bootstrap and test run on x86_64 and
submit shortly thereafter if everything goes fine.