* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-23 20:56 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-23 21:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-23 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-23 20:51:40 UTC ---
Created attachment 26970
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26970
Testcase
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-23 20:56 ` [Bug middle-end/52693] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-23 21:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-23 22:46 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-23 21:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-23 20:55:42 UTC ---
The correct output should be 120 which is what happens at -O0.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-23 20:56 ` [Bug middle-end/52693] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-23 21:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-23 22:46 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-23 22:49 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-23 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|mjambor at suse dot cz |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-23 22:30:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> With the attach testcase, SRA does the following replacement which seems wrong:
> value = stack.l[D.4470_102];
> With
> value_77 = MEM[(struct exprList_s *)&stack];
> value$u_620 = MEM[(struct exprList_s *)&stack].u;
>
It is confusing but I do not think it is wrong. When you disable the
special handling of enumeral types in analyze_access_subtree, you get
(in this case IMHO equivalent):
value$type_621 = MEM[(struct exprList_s *)&stack].type;
value$u_622 = MEM[(struct exprList_s *)&stack].u;
which is exactly what we'd expect when breaking value into the two
components it consists of. And the testcase still fails.
It is equivalent because the first MEM_REF is of type unsigned int,
whereas the second one loads the whole structure and then there's a
COMPONENT_REF to load only the second integer from it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-23 22:46 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-23 22:49 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-23 23:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-23 22:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-23 22:45:47 UTC ---
OTOH, I can confirm that the problematic variable is value, just not
SRAing that one makes the testcase to return 120. (In the same
function, SRA creates replacements also for stack and fifo variables
and that thus seems fine.)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-23 22:49 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-23 23:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-24 0:52 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-23 23:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-23 23:00:47 UTC ---
Wait a minute,
value = stack.l[D.4470_102];
With
value_77 = MEM[(struct exprList_s *)&stack];
value$u_620 = MEM[(struct exprList_s *)&stack].u;
Where is D.4470_102 being taken into account? I don't see it in the dumps.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-23 23:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-24 0:52 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-24 3:10 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-24 0:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2012-03-24
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-24 00:50:09 UTC ---
Right, sorry, the square brackets of MEM_REF made me feel the array
reference was still there even though it actually disappears. When I
realized that, analyzing the issue was actually easy.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-24 0:52 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-24 3:10 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-27 18:40 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-24 3:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-24 00:51:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 26971
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26971
Proposed untested fix
I'm currently bootstrapping and testing this patch.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-24 3:10 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-27 18:40 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-28 15:25 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-27 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-27 18:22:44 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Mar 27 18:22:39 2012
New Revision: 185891
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185891
Log:
2012-03-27 Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>
PR middle-end/52693
* tree-sra.c (sra_modify_assign): Do not call
load_assign_lhs_subreplacements when working with an unscalarizable
region.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr52693.c: New test.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr52693.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-27 18:40 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-28 15:25 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-28 18:21 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-28 15:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-28 15:04:53 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 28 15:04:45 2012
New Revision: 185920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185920
Log:
2012-03-28 Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>
PR middle-end/52693
* tree-sra.c (sra_modify_assign): Do not call
load_assign_lhs_subreplacements when working with an unscalarizable
region.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr52693.c: New test.
Added:
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr52693.c
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/tree-sra.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-28 15:25 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-28 18:21 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-28 18:23 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-28 18:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-28 18:03:34 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 28 18:03:28 2012
New Revision: 185921
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185921
Log:
2012-03-28 Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>
PR middle-end/52693
* tree-sra.c (sra_modify_assign): Do not call
load_assign_lhs_subreplacements when working with an unscalarizable
region.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr52693.c: New test.
Added:
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr52693.c
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/tree-sra.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-28 18:21 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-28 18:23 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-28 19:04 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-18 13:15 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-28 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-28 18:20:28 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 28 18:20:20 2012
New Revision: 185923
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185923
Log:
2012-03-28 Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>
PR middle-end/52693
* tree-sra.c (sra_modify_assign): Do not call
load_assign_lhs_subreplacements when working with an unscalarizable
region.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr52693.c: New test.
Added:
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr52693.c
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/tree-sra.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-28 18:23 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-03-28 19:04 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-18 13:15 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-03-28 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
| |atches/2012-03/msg01708.htm
| |l
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-28 18:22:49 UTC ---
Patch (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-03/msg01708.html)
applied to all affected branches (4.5, 4.6 and 4.7) and trunk.
Thus, fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/52693] Wrong code with SRA and arrays
2012-03-23 20:51 [Bug middle-end/52693] New: Wrong code with SRA and arrays pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-28 19:04 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-04-18 13:15 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-04-18 13:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-18 13:13:44 UTC ---
Damn it, I said fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread