https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91137
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think the issue is
inv_expr 5: ((signed long) &d + 19600) - (signed long) &c
I hope Bin can investigate this. In the end we can only fight the RTL
alias analysis issue with heuristics here though...
We're fearing compile-time issues from a fix like the following, but
ultimatively find_base_term is known broken for a _looooong_ time.
Index: gcc/alias.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/alias.c (revision 273355)
+++ gcc/alias.c (working copy)
@@ -2003,16 +2003,20 @@ find_base_term (rtx x, vec<std::pair<cse
term is from a pointer or is a named object or a special address
(like an argument or stack reference), then use it for the
base term. */
- rtx base = find_base_term (tmp1, visited_vals);
- if (base != NULL_RTX
- && ((REG_P (tmp1) && REG_POINTER (tmp1))
- || known_base_value_p (base)))
- return base;
- base = find_base_term (tmp2, visited_vals);
- if (base != NULL_RTX
- && ((REG_P (tmp2) && REG_POINTER (tmp2))
- || known_base_value_p (base)))
- return base;
+ rtx base1 = find_base_term (tmp1, visited_vals);
+ if (!(base1 != NULL_RTX
+ && ((REG_P (tmp1) && REG_POINTER (tmp1))
+ || known_base_value_p (base1))))
+ base1 = NULL_RTX;
+ rtx base2 = find_base_term (tmp2, visited_vals);
+ if (!(base2 != NULL_RTX
+ && ((REG_P (tmp2) && REG_POINTER (tmp2))
+ || known_base_value_p (base2))))
+ base2 = NULL_RTX;
+ if (base1 && !base2)
+ return base1;
+ if (!base1 && base2)
+ return base2;
/* We could not determine which of the two operands was the
base register and which was the index. So we can determine
