[Bug lto/43201] Missed optimization with `-flto'

2010-02-27 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-27 21:33 --- This is because p = 0; is not detected as dead store by tree DSE as in p = 0; r = *q; p = (T *) t[0]; *q may load from p because with LTO TBAA rules for pointers have been relaxed (for a reason but also i

[Bug lto/43201] Missed optimization with `-flto'

2010-02-27 Thread d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2010-02-27 21:06 --- Created an attachment (id=19980) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19980&action=view) C source -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43201

[Bug lto/43201] Missed optimization with `-flto'

2010-02-27 Thread d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2010-02-27 21:05 --- Created an attachment (id=19979) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19979&action=view) Code compiled without `-flto' -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43201

[Bug lto/43201] Missed optimization with `-flto'

2010-02-27 Thread d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2010-02-27 21:04 --- Created an attachment (id=19978) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19978&action=view) Code produced by lto1 Compiled with `-O2 -flto' -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43