On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, Richard Biener wrote:
>> Sigh - I see GCC optimizes memmove as well as memcpy in this case, so
>> changing the offending memcpy calls to memmoves would be a bit cleaner. OK to
>> go with this instead?
>
> I think that's better. Or conditionalizing the offending ones on dest! =
On June 25, 2018 4:52:43 PM GMT+02:00, Alexander Monakov
wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>>
>> In PR 86311 Valgrind flags a call to memcpy with overlapping buffers.
>This can
>> happen in reorder{23,45} helpers when we're reordering in-place, and
>the 3rd/5th
>> element doe
On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> In PR 86311 Valgrind flags a call to memcpy with overlapping buffers. This can
> happen in reorder{23,45} helpers when we're reordering in-place, and the
> 3rd/5th
> element doesn't need to be moved: in that case the middle memcpy is called
> with
Hi,
In PR 86311 Valgrind flags a call to memcpy with overlapping buffers. This can
happen in reorder{23,45} helpers when we're reordering in-place, and the 3rd/5th
element doesn't need to be moved: in that case the middle memcpy is called
with source == destination.
The fix is simple: just use a
