Commit 30abf793 by Kazu Hirata Committed by Kazu Hirata

tree-vrp.c (compare_values): Check that VAL1 and VAL2 are both pointers or both integers.

	* tree-vrp.c (compare_values): Check that VAL1 and VAL2 are
	both pointers or both integers.

From-SVN: r98273
parent 101c5bc5
2005-04-17 Kazu Hirata <kazu@cs.umass.edu>
* tree-vrp.c (compare_values): Check that VAL1 and VAL2 are
both pointers or both integers.
2005-04-17 Richard Sandiford <rsandifo@redhat.com> 2005-04-17 Richard Sandiford <rsandifo@redhat.com>
* config/mips/iris6.h (DRIVER_SELF_SPECS): Check -march as well as * config/mips/iris6.h (DRIVER_SELF_SPECS): Check -march as well as
......
...@@ -286,14 +286,13 @@ compare_values (tree val1, tree val2) ...@@ -286,14 +286,13 @@ compare_values (tree val1, tree val2)
if (val1 == val2) if (val1 == val2)
return 0; return 0;
/* Below we rely on the fact that VAL1 and VAL2 are both pointers or
both integers. */
gcc_assert (POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (val1))
== POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (val2)));
/* Do some limited symbolic comparisons. */ /* Do some limited symbolic comparisons. */
/* FIXME: The second check of POINTER_TYPE_P should not be necessary if (!POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (val1)))
because we should be comparing values of the same type here, but
for whatever reason, the front end throws us a type mismatched
comparison. For now, work around the problem by checking both
types. See PR 21021 and PR 21024. */
if (!POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (val1))
&& !POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (val2)))
{ {
/* We can determine some comparisons against +INF and -INF even /* We can determine some comparisons against +INF and -INF even
if the other value is an expression. */ if the other value is an expression. */
...@@ -406,13 +405,7 @@ compare_values (tree val1, tree val2) ...@@ -406,13 +405,7 @@ compare_values (tree val1, tree val2)
if (!is_gimple_min_invariant (val1) || !is_gimple_min_invariant (val2)) if (!is_gimple_min_invariant (val1) || !is_gimple_min_invariant (val2))
return -2; return -2;
/* FIXME: The second check of POINTER_TYPE_P should not be necessary if (!POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (val1)))
because we should be comparing values of the same type here, but
for whatever reason, the front end throws us a type mismatched
comparison. For now, work around the problem by checking both
types. See PR 21021 and PR 21024. */
if (!POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (val1))
&& !POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (val2)))
return tree_int_cst_compare (val1, val2); return tree_int_cst_compare (val1, val2);
else else
{ {
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment