On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> When working on PR69710, I ran into this latent bug in which alignment
>>> information is wrongly updated for pointer var
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> When working on PR69710, I ran into this latent bug in which alignment
>> information is wrongly updated for pointer variables. It results in memory
>> exceptions on x86_64 afte
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> When working on PR69710, I ran into this latent bug in which alignment
> information is wrongly updated for pointer variables. It results in memory
> exceptions on x86_64 after patch for PR69710. Scenario is that copy_ref_info
> tries
Hi,
When working on PR69710, I ran into this latent bug in which alignment
information is wrongly updated for pointer variables. It results in memory
exceptions on x86_64 after patch for PR69710. Scenario is that copy_ref_info
tries to update base's alignment in TARGET_MEM_REF[base + index <<
