public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "glisse at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/52436] BIT_FIELD_REF <MEM_REF <>> should be canonicalized for non-bitfield accesses Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 14:37:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-52436-4-CMETRKmHw2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-52436-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52436 --- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-04-02 14:36:59 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > No, get_addr_base_and_unit_offset_1 only is supposed to return the > addressable offset into an object - it doesn't care about access sizes. It is also allowed to say "bad idea, I will return NULL", but ok. > But you can't really do what you do there. You are possibly > transforming [...] Good point, thanks. > which is not correct, obviously. "combining" with memory > accesses isn't trivial, certainly not a task I would consider > for forwprop. I can't think of a suitable existing pass > that would combine this, but value-numbering should eventually > value-number both cases the same at least. I guess that leaves the vector lowering pass as the easiest alternative for PR55266: split all unsupported memory reads into supported reads and a constructor (and similarly, split writes into bit_field_refs and writes) and hope that nothing does the reverse transformation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-02 14:37 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2012-02-29 14:33 [Bug middle-end/52436] New: " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-29 14:21 ` [Bug middle-end/52436] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-01 15:15 ` glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-02 8:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-02 14:09 ` glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-02 14:22 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2013-04-02 14:37 ` glisse at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2013-04-04 12:08 ` glisse 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-52436-4-CMETRKmHw2@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: linkBe 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).