https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92925
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #7 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92925
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
> So I wonder why we bother to feed 'bitpos' to
> set_mem_attributes_minus_bitpos when we expect the MEM_ATTRS to be
> created from solely 'T' (do we?) and then later apply 'bitpos' via
> adjust_address or f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92925
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92925
>
> --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> So we would probably need to add full mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92925
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
So we would probably need to add full misalignment information to MEM_ATTRS if
we want to handle this properly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92925
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|RTl expansion throws away |RTL expansion throws away
