Commit 3eebae0b by Diego Novillo Committed by Diego Novillo

tree-ssa-alias.c (merge_pointed_to_info): Fix comment regarding PT_MALLOC.


	* tree-ssa-alias.c (merge_pointed_to_info): Fix comment
	regarding PT_MALLOC.

From-SVN: r91164
parent 4f514514
2004-11-24 Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com>
* tree-ssa-alias.c (merge_pointed_to_info): Fix comment
regarding PT_MALLOC.
2004-11-24 Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> 2004-11-24 Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
* config/i386/i386.c (optimization_options): Use * config/i386/i386.c (optimization_options): Use
......
...@@ -1714,20 +1714,17 @@ merge_pointed_to_info (struct alias_info *ai, tree dest, tree orig) ...@@ -1714,20 +1714,17 @@ merge_pointed_to_info (struct alias_info *ai, tree dest, tree orig)
... ...
P_j = P_i + X; P_j = P_i + X;
P_j would be marked as PT_MALLOC, which is wrong because P_j would be marked as PT_MALLOC, however we currently do not
PT_MALLOC implies that the pointer may not point to another handle cases of more than one pointer pointing to the same
variable. malloc'd area.
FIXME 1: Subsequent analysis may determine that P_j FIXME: If the merging comes from an expression that preserves
cannot alias anything else, but we are being conservative the PT_MALLOC attribute (copy assignment, address
here. arithmetic), we ought to merge PT_MALLOC, but then both
pointers would end up getting different name tags because
FIXME 2: If the merging comes from a copy assignment, we create_name_tags is not smart enough to determine that the
ought to merge PT_MALLOC, but then both pointers would end up two come from the same malloc call. Copy propagation before
getting different name tags because create_name_tags is not aliasing should cure this. */
smart enough to determine that the two come from the same
malloc call. Copy propagation before aliasing should cure
this. */
gcc_assert (orig_pi != dest_pi); gcc_assert (orig_pi != dest_pi);
dest_pi->pt_malloc = 0; dest_pi->pt_malloc = 0;
......
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