------- Comment #14 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-25 11:31 -------
I have no idea why is speculation even attempted here (it doesn't make any
sense,
the pointer is surely non-NULL, it points to a global variable), and apparently
nothing checks whether it is safe to move over the speculative load over
the store (at least, I've put a breakpoint on nonoverlapping_memrefs_p
and {{,canon_}true,anti,output}_dependence and none of them hit with any MEMs
with r44 or POST_MODIFY r59, -60. Maxim, speculation is your baby, could you
please have a look?
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35659
