From 554fd8c5195424bdbcabf5de30fdc183aba391bd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: upstream source tree Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 20:14:05 -0400 Subject: obtained gcc-4.6.4.tar.bz2 from upstream website; verified gcc-4.6.4.tar.bz2.sig; imported gcc-4.6.4 source tree from verified upstream tarball. downloading a git-generated archive based on the 'upstream' tag should provide you with a source tree that is binary identical to the one extracted from the above tarball. if you have obtained the source via the command 'git clone', however, do note that line-endings of files in your working directory might differ from line-endings of the respective files in the upstream repository. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-3.c | 137 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 137 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-3.c (limited to 'gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-3.c') diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-3.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000..86a706b80 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-3.c @@ -0,0 +1,137 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "-O -fdump-tree-ccp2" } */ + +extern void link_error (void); + +/* Some addresses clearly cannot be equal, check that some address + expressions can be evaluated as constants. + Most of the tests are folding tests, but at least some require + points-to analysis, so we scan the first CCP dump after PTA. */ + +char g1, g2; +void test6 (char p1, char p2) +{ + char l1 = 1, l2 = 2; + static char s1 = 5, s2 = 7; + if (&l1 == &l2) + link_error (); + + if (&p1 == &p2) + link_error (); + + if (&s1 == &s2) + link_error (); + + if (&g1 == &g2) + link_error (); + + if (&p1 == &l1) + link_error (); + + if (&p1 == &s1) + link_error (); + + if (&p1 == &l2) + link_error (); + + if (&p1 == &g1) + link_error (); + + if (&l1 == &g1) + link_error (); + + if (&s1 == &g1) + link_error (); +} + +extern void *alloc (int) __attribute__ ((malloc)); +char gca1[128]; +char* __restrict__ rgc1; +char* test66 (char * __restrict__ rp1, char * __restrict__ rp2, char *p1) +{ + char * __restrict__ rl1 = p1; + char * l1 = (char*) alloc (20); + + if (l1 == rgc1) + link_error (); + + if (l1 == rp1) + link_error (); + + if (l1 == rl1) + link_error (); + + if (l1 == gca1) + link_error (); + + if (rl1 == rgc1) + link_error (); + + if (rl1 == rp1) + link_error (); + + if (rl1 == gca1) + link_error (); + + if (rp1 == rp2) + link_error (); + + if (rp1 == rgc1) + link_error (); + + if (rp1 == gca1) + link_error (); + + if (gca1 == rgc1) + link_error (); + +} + +int gci1[128]; +int* __restrict__ rgi1; +int* test666 (int * __restrict__ rp1, int * __restrict__ rp2, int *p1) +{ + int * __restrict__ rl1 = p1; + int * l1 = (int*) alloc (20); + + if (l1 == rgi1) + link_error (); + + if (l1 == rp1) + link_error (); + + if (l1 == rl1) + link_error (); + + if (l1 == gci1) + link_error (); + + if (rl1 == rgi1) + link_error (); + + if (rl1 == rp1) + link_error (); + + if (rl1 == gci1) + link_error (); + + if (rp1 == rp2) + link_error (); + + if (rp1 == rgi1) + link_error (); + + if (rp1 == gci1) + link_error (); + + if (gci1 == rgi1) + link_error (); +} + + +/* There should be not link_error calls, if there is any the + optimization has failed */ +/* ??? While we indeed don't handle some of these, a couple of the + restrict tests are incorrect. */ +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "link_error" 0 "ccp2" { xfail *-*-* } } } */ +/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "ccp2" } } */ -- cgit v1.2.3