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 middle-end/51895] [4.7 Regression] ICE in simplify_subreg
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:47:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-51895-4-nCpgeCdxyz@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-51895-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51895
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-01-19 10:16:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> > bftype = TREE_TYPE (base);
> > if (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (exp)) != BLKmode)
> > bftype = TREE_TYPE (exp);
> > return expand_expr (build3 (BIT_FIELD_REF, bftype,
> > base,
> > TYPE_SIZE (TREE_TYPE (exp)),
> > bit_offset),
> > target, tmode, modifier);
> > base here is TImode (x PARM_DECL), but exp is BLKmode, so this returns a TImode
> > pseudo. Shouldn't it store it into a BLKmode temporary and return that MEM
> > instead?
>
> Using a BIT_FIELD_REF looked most convenient. Using extract_bit_field
> may also be an option (which I suppose is what the above ends up doing?)
I think if exp is BLKmode, then we don't want to do a BIT_FIELD_REF nor
extract_bit_field. We IMHO need to store base into a temporary and just adjust
the MEM. Or extract the bit field and then store it into a temporary and
adjust, but the former looks easier.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-19 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-19 2:22 [Bug middle-end/51895] New: " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 4:17 ` [Bug middle-end/51895] " bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 8:19 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 10:16 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 10:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2012-01-19 12:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 13:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 13:32 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 13:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 14:07 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-19 16:28 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-20 9:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-20 9:54 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-20 14:36 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-20 14:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-20 15:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-20 17:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-23 12:37 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-26 14:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-26 15:03 ` jakub 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-51895-4-nCpgeCdxyz@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).