[LLVMdev] Is it an opt bug ?
Duncan Sands
baldrick at free.fr
Wed Feb 29 01:51:27 PST 2012
Hi Seb,
> Already done here : http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12130
that doesn't describe the original issue (second store removed), it is talking
about a different issue that appeared at -O1 (and it first seemed to explain
your original problem; but now I think the -O1 transform was correct and does
not explain your original problem).
Ciao, Duncan.
>
> Thanks for your answers
> Best Regards
> Seb
>
> 2012/2/29 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr <mailto:baldrick at free.fr>>
>
> Hi Seb,
>
>
> If I remove datalayout definition, code is not optimized and work as
> expected.
> So my question is:
>
> What attribute/value/interpretation of data-layout would cause this type
> of bug?
>
>
> all kinds of optimizers use datalayout (and are disabled if there is none). For
> example, alias analysis, anything that needs to understand getelementptr
> offsets, the list is endless.
>
> I suggest you open a bug report, describing your original problem as in your
> first email.
>
> Ciao, Duncan.
>
> Thanks for your answers
> Seb
>
> 2012/2/28 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr <mailto:baldrick at free.fr>
> <mailto:baldrick at free.fr <mailto:baldrick at free.fr>>>
>
>
> On 28/02/12 17:48, John Regehr wrote:
> >> void t2(double *x)
> >> {
> >> long long a[2];
> >> a[0] = 3;
> >> a[1] = 5;
> >> *x = * ((double *) a);
> >> *(x+1) = * ((double *) &a[a[0]-2]);
> >> }
> >
> > Doesn't this code violate the strict aliasing rules?
>
> Maybe, but the LLVM IR he showed seems perfectly well defined.
>
> Ciao, Duncan.
> ______________________________ _________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
> <mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu>>
> http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/ mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev>
>
>
>
>
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list