From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-423202-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15513 invoked by alias); 27 May 2013 09:54:15 -0000
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
Received: (qmail 15438 invoked by uid 48); 27 May 2013 09:54:05 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/57417] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] hang on volatile int array
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 09:54:00 -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-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-57417-4-oYUDKEpiko@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57417-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57417-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg01875.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57417

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The existing support for comparing addresses in operand_equal_p cannot handle
this as the volatile array is local.

It seems to me that there is no good reason to ever treat addresses of
TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS trees as different if there is not TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS
on offset determining pieces (though that would rely on gimplification
for COMPONENT_REFs?).

I wonder if this is the right time to introduce gimple_op_equal_p (),
wrapping operand_equal_p but handling a few cases less conservative...