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 rtl-optimization/57359] wrong code for union access at -O3 on x86_64-linux Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 18:33:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-57359-4-eBXKv9P8bK@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-57359-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57359 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I think this testcase is invalid. C/C++ just disallow type punning through unions altogether (only one union member can be active at each point), while GCC allows it as an extension, it requires the accesses being done through the union, not through pointers to individual union fields. Quoting info gcc: " The practice of reading from a different union member than the one most recently written to (called "type-punning") is common. Even with `-fstrict-aliasing', type-punning is allowed, provided the memory is accessed through the union type. So, the code above will work as expected. *Note Structures unions enumerations and bit-fields implementation::. However, this code might not: int f() { union a_union t; int* ip; t.d = 3.0; ip = &t.i; return *ip; } ". But that is exactly what the testcase does, you have a pointer to u.ll and a pointer to u.i and use them interleaved. The code would be valid if la elements and k were pointers to the union and ppll pointer to pointer to the union, and accessed the i or ll fields in there.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-21 18:33 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-05-21 18:20 [Bug rtl-optimization/57359] New: " dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2013-05-21 18:26 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/57359] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-21 18:33 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2013-05-23 19:51 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2013-05-29 21:14 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2013-05-30 7:13 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-31 8:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-31 16:32 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2013-05-31 21:07 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2013-06-03 19:15 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2013-06-04 12:37 ` [Bug tree-optimization/57359] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 7:15 ` [Bug tree-optimization/57359] store motion causes wrong code for union access at -O3 rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 8:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 10:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 12:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-20 12:34 ` pascal_cuoq at hotmail dot com 2020-04-20 12:39 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2020-04-21 7:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-27 9:17 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-27 9:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-27 12:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-04-30 12:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-07 10:12 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-07 10:13 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-11 12:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-11 12:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-11 14:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-11 14:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-12 6:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-12 11:53 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-12 12:13 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-18 9:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-06-11 15:55 ` pinskia 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-57359-4-eBXKv9P8bK@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).