On 07/24/2014 02:38 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
This seems to be the statement which has its RHS converted to to a
MEM_REF[&_6], am I right? I wonder whether it is correct input
though, because it looks like it has mismatched types. The LHS is
clearly an aggregate of type struct S while the RHS is
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sorry for late reply, I've been on vacation and then preparing for
> Cauldron. Anyway...
>
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 05:13:13PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> On 06/17/2014 04:54 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> >Weird... does the followi
Hi,
sorry for late reply, I've been on vacation and then preparing for
Cauldron. Anyway...
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 05:13:13PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 04:54 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> >Weird... does the following (untested) patch help?
> >
> >diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/
On 06/17/2014 04:54 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
Weird... does the following (untested) patch help?
diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/tree-sra.c
index 0afa197..747b1b6 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-sra.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-sra.c
@@ -3277,6 +3277,8 @@ sra_modify_assign (gimple *stmt, gimple_stmt_iterator
*gsi)
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 01:38:49PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Bernd Schmidt
> wrote:
> > There's code in regimplification that makes us use an extra temporary
> > when we encounter a call returning a non-BLKmode structure. This seems
> > somewhat inefficient
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> There's code in regimplification that makes us use an extra temporary
> when we encounter a call returning a non-BLKmode structure. This seems
> somewhat inefficient and unnecessary, and when used from the
> lower-addr-spaces pass I'm workin
