------- Comment #6 from rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2006-06-05 11:04 ------- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] tree check failure building FreePOOMA
> Someone who understands SCEV really needs to fix it. On this particular piece of code SCEV seems to behave just fine; you ask for the evolution of a pointer, and then use TYPE_MAX_VALUE on its type -- that's not going to work. > It's been a consistent > source of problems for VRP -- whether it's giving us bogus ranges (ranges > outside the given type) or claiming variables do not wrap when in fact they do > wrap (IIRC there's still an outstanding PR due to this problem). > > If someone were to fix the SCEV problem touched by pr 25900, then the > offending > VRP code could be eliminated. I will have a look. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27865
