[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-17 Thread slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #12 from Sergei Trofimovich --- I confirm the change fixed `perf` startup for me. Thank you!

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-17 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dc48d1d1d4458773f89f21b2f019f66ddf88f2e5 commit r14-3296-gdc48d1d1d4458773f89f21b2f019f66ddf88f2e5 Author: Andrew MacLeod Date:

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-17 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Macleod --- > At the hazard of stating the obvious: it's a wrong-code when you execute it > (not a gcc ICE). > doh. of course. test is in progress. Richi was correct. Although the code in range-ops for

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-16 Thread slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #9 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Created attachment 55744 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55744=edit bug.S At the hazard of stating the obvious: it's a wrong-code when you execute it (not a gcc ICE). Should fail

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-16 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleod --- Do I need some special target or something? on trunk just "-fno-strict-overflow -O3" doesnt fail for me on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu... ./cc1 -fno-strict-overflow -O3 009.c -quiet

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-16 Thread slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #7 from Sergei Trofimovich --- commit bd400db6d3ec167142ace352db00f84d382e33a8 (HEAD) Date: Fri Oct 15 12:06:27 2021 -0400 Add --param=vrp1-mode and --param=vrp2-mode. (the first commit that adds the option) generates SIGSEGVs

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-16 Thread sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #6 from Sam James --- Can you bisect further back with -param=vrp2-mode=ranger, to force ranger before it was the default?

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-16 Thread slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #5 from Sergei Trofimovich --- For what it's worth bisect pointed at r12-4871-g502ffb1f389011 $ git bisect good 502ffb1f389011b28ee51815242c7397790802d5 is the first bad commit commit 502ffb1f389011b28ee51815242c7397790802d5 Date:

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-15 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > bool > operator_addr_expr::fold_range (irange , tree type, > const irange , > const irange , >

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-14 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- bool operator_addr_expr::fold_range (irange , tree type, const irange , const irange , relation_trio) const {

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-14 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC|

[Bug middle-end/111009] [12/13/14 regression] -fno-strict-overflow erroneously elides null pointer checks and causes SIGSEGV on perf from linux-6.4.10

2023-08-14 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111009 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---