From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29833 invoked by alias); 7 Sep 2004 21:35:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 29824 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2004 21:35:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 Sep 2004 21:35:43 -0000 Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34) id AA28326; Tue, 7 Sep 04 17:38:43 EDT Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 21:35:00 -0000 From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Message-Id: <10409072138.AA28326@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> To: amacleod@redhat.com Subject: Re: Problem with operand handling Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00324.txt.bz2 I think he was looking for the traceback froim this abort() so we can see where the real operand is incorrectly being added to the alias list... Sorry. This was a small enough test case that I already was able to set a breakpoint there. It's from compute_flow_insensitive_aliasing. But I see something interesting. This is in addressable_vars and TREE_ADDRESSABLE isn't set. That's wrong, isn't it?