[llvm-dev] RFC: Resolving TBAA issues

[Ivan A. Kosarev via llvm-dev]

Can you share the snippets you use?

Reloading x->i may affect performance, but not necessarily execution 
semantics. So if it is not required to reload the value (what I think is 
true), then gcc does the right thing in both cases.


On 19/08/17 19:28, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> (and note: It's not clear GCC agrees with my interpretation. I can get 
> it to seem to answer both ways. Depending on what i do, and looking at 
> optimizer dumps, i can get it to ignore the access to x->i, and assume 
> it has no effect on b->a, *and* get it to assume it does, and cause 
> reloads of x->i)
>
> +Richard in case he has any thoughts.
>