------- Comment #17 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2007-06-24 10:27 ------- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Segmentation fault in build_classic_dist_vector_1() at tree-data-ref.c:2700
On 6/24/07, Sebastian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 6/24/07, Sebastian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So this just looks like we want to improve operand_equal_p, and not > > touch the folder this time. Probably we can implement one more flag > > for stripping nop conversions of operands. > > > > Actually I think that the test in operand_equal_p is too strong for > our case where the expression under the nops is just an SSA_NAME. > > Would a patch like the following one be acceptable? I've put this > patch to bootstrap and test with --enable-checking=yes,fold,rtl. I think you just made oep_can_strip_nops too lose. I think you just need to strip the NOPs off the call to operand_equal_p when doing a + ~a (and ~a + a) folding. Or maybe use op1/op0 instead. I don't think it is safe to strip NOPs even for SSA_NAMES in operand_equal_p. Thanks, Andrew Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32461
