------- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-23
15:09 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] miscompiled
pointer subtraction broke Linux kernel
On Sat, 2005-04-23 at 14:59 +0000, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-23
> 14:59 -------
> Shouldn't that be then also:
> - if (!is_gimple_min_invariant (genop1))
> + if (!is_gimple_min_invariant (folded))
> ?
>
>
yes
In fact, the error actually makes no sense (IE you guys are overlooking
an important fact).
is_gimple_min_invariants are legal operands to unary expressions,
regardless of whether they are "complex" or not, or so i was told.
So if genop1 is is_gimple_min_invariant, it should be fine there, and
you shouldn't need to use folded.
If it wasn't, we'd force_gimple_operand it.
I'm pretty sure you are just covering up a disconnect in what we allow
as gimple and what we handle.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21173
