Hi!

Andrew mentioned on IRC he found walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops
doesn't handle COND_EXPR weirdo first argument well, the following
patch is an attempt to handle that.

I've noticed similar spot in verify_ssa, though in that case I'm not
sure about whether the change is so desirable, as it doesn't seem to
handle SSA_NAMEs embedded in MEM_EXPRs, ARRAY_REFs etc. either.

Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
Or just the gimple.c part?

2011-10-13  Jakub Jelinek  <ja...@redhat.com>

        * gimple.c (walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops): Call visit_addr
        also on COND_EXPR/VEC_COND_EXPR comparison operands if they are
        ADDR_EXPRs.

        * tree-ssa.c (verify_ssa): For COND_EXPR/VEC_COND_EXPR count
        SSA_NAMEs in comparison operand as well.

--- gcc/gimple.c.jj     2011-10-13 11:13:39.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/gimple.c        2011-10-13 11:15:25.000000000 +0200
@@ -5313,9 +5313,24 @@ walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops (gimple st
               || gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_COND))
     {
       for (i = 0; i < gimple_num_ops (stmt); ++i)
-       if (gimple_op (stmt, i)
-           && TREE_CODE (gimple_op (stmt, i)) == ADDR_EXPR)
-         ret |= visit_addr (stmt, TREE_OPERAND (gimple_op (stmt, i), 0), data);
+       {
+         tree op = gimple_op (stmt, i);
+         if (op == NULL_TREE)
+           ;
+         else if (TREE_CODE (op) == ADDR_EXPR)
+           ret |= visit_addr (stmt, TREE_OPERAND (op, 0), data);
+         /* COND_EXPR and VCOND_EXPR rhs1 argument is a comparison
+            tree with two operands.  */
+         else if (i == 1 && COMPARISON_CLASS_P (op))
+           {
+             if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op, 0)) == ADDR_EXPR)
+               ret |= visit_addr (stmt, TREE_OPERAND (TREE_OPERAND (op, 0),
+                                                      0), data);
+             if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op, 1)) == ADDR_EXPR)
+               ret |= visit_addr (stmt, TREE_OPERAND (TREE_OPERAND (op, 1),
+                                                      0), data);
+           }
+       }
     }
   else if (is_gimple_call (stmt))
     {
--- gcc/tree-ssa.c.jj   2011-10-07 10:03:28.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/tree-ssa.c      2011-10-13 11:19:30.000000000 +0200
@@ -1069,14 +1069,27 @@ verify_ssa (bool check_modified_stmt)
          for (i = 0; i < gimple_num_ops (stmt); i++)
            {
              op = gimple_op (stmt, i);
-             if (op && TREE_CODE (op) == SSA_NAME && --count < 0)
+             if (op == NULL_TREE)
+               continue;
+             if (TREE_CODE (op) == SSA_NAME)
+               --count;
+             /* COND_EXPR and VCOND_EXPR rhs1 argument is a comparison
+                tree with two operands.  */
+             else if (i == 1 && COMPARISON_CLASS_P (op))
                {
-                 error ("number of operands and imm-links don%'t agree"
-                        " in statement");
-                 print_gimple_stmt (stderr, stmt, 0, TDF_VOPS|TDF_MEMSYMS);
-                 goto err;
+                 if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op, 0)) == SSA_NAME)
+                   --count;
+                 if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op, 1)) == SSA_NAME)
+                   --count;
                }
            }
+         if (count < 0)
+           {
+             error ("number of operands and imm-links don%'t agree"
+                    " in statement");
+             print_gimple_stmt (stderr, stmt, 0, TDF_VOPS|TDF_MEMSYMS);
+             goto err;
+           }
 
          FOR_EACH_SSA_USE_OPERAND (use_p, stmt, iter, SSA_OP_USE|SSA_OP_VUSE)
            {

        Jakub

Reply via email to