[Bug c++/24849] [gomp] ICE in expand_expr_real_1
--- Comment #6 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-19 15:18 --- Subject: Bug 24849 Author: dnovillo Date: Sat Nov 19 15:18:08 2005 New Revision: 107220 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=107220 Log: PR 24849 * omp-low.c (determine_parallel_type): Do not handle OMP_FOR. testsuite/ PR 24849 * g++.dg/gomp/pr24849.C: New test. * gcc.dg/gomp/for-19.c: XFAIL. * gcc.dg/gomp/for-18.c: XFAIL. Added: branches/gomp-20050608-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/pr24849.C Modified: branches/gomp-20050608-branch/gcc/ChangeLog.gomp branches/gomp-20050608-branch/gcc/omp-low.c branches/gomp-20050608-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.gomp branches/gomp-20050608-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/for-18.c branches/gomp-20050608-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/for-19.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24849
[Bug c++/24849] [gomp] ICE in expand_expr_real_1
--- Comment #7 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-19 15:18 --- Workaround applied. The actual solution separates lowering from optimization, once all the OMP directives are lowered to a language-independent form, we can apply the combined parallel+loop optimization without running into these odd corners. I need a few more days to finish implementing this separation. In the meantime, we can live without this optimization. -- dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24849
[Bug c++/24849] [gomp] ICE in expand_expr_real_1
--- Comment #5 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-17 10:02
---
Here's a shorter testcase without templates:
==
void foo()
{
#pragma omp parallel
{
int i, N;
#pragma omp for schedule (dynamic)
for (i=0; iN; ++i) ;
}
}
==
The bug only affects the C++ frontend.
The above testcase compiles fine with the C frontend.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Keywords||monitored
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-11-17 10:02:30
date||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24849
[Bug c++/24849] [gomp] ICE in expand_expr_real_1
--- Comment #4 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 15:57 --- Working on this. -- dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24849
[Bug c++/24849] [gomp] ICE in expand_expr_real_1
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-15 08:59 --- The problem here is a mismatch between determine_parallel_type in gimplify.c and omp-low.c. During gimplification, it is not considered to be a combined parallel loop, because OMP_PARALLEL's body contains a DECL_EXPR (for m variable) before OMP_FOR. But during omp lowering, that DECL_EXPR is already gone and therefore the loop is handled as a combined loop. But there are statements before the FOR_STMT inside of OMP_FOR, and those are moved into a wrong context when doing a parallel loop. Maybe we should ignore (some?) DECL_EXPRs in determine_parallel_type, maybe we need to note the combined parallel status in OMP_PARALLEL's flags. -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org, ||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24849
[Bug c++/24849] [gomp] ICE in expand_expr_real_1
--- Comment #3 from martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de 2005-11-15 09:07
---
Some more information:
- I didn't encounter the bug about a week ago
- on x86_64 with checking disabled, I get
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/martin g++ -c -v -fopenmp test.cc
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /home/guest/martin/gompcc/configure --quiet
--prefix=/home/guest/martin/ugccgomp --disable-checking
--enable-languages=c++,fortran --with-gmp=/home/guest/martin/mygmp
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch 20051109 (experimental) (merged
20051109)
/home/guest/martin/ugccgomp/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch/cc1plus
-quiet -v -D_GNU_SOURCE test.cc -quiet -dumpbase test.cc -mtune=k8 -auxbase
test -version -fopenmp -o /tmp/ccH4pPJ3.s
ignoring nonexistent directory
/home/guest/martin/ugccgomp/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch/../../../../x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include
#include ... search starts here:
#include ... search starts here:
/home/guest/martin/ugccgomp/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch/../../../../include/c++/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch
/home/guest/martin/ugccgomp/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch/../../../../include/c++/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
/home/guest/martin/ugccgomp/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch/../../../../include/c++/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch/backward
/usr/local/include
/home/guest/martin/ugccgomp/include
/home/guest/martin/ugccgomp/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch/include
/usr/include
End of search list.
GNU C++ version 4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch 20051109 (experimental) (merged
20051109) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch 20051109
(experimental) (merged 20051109).
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=100 --param ggc-min-heapsize=131072
Compiler executable checksum: 77b131b8a7d189e4ba7ca911c1f9b018
test.cc: In member function รข:
test.cc:10: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
(insn 14 13 38 (set (reg:DI 0 ax [orig:58 D.2187 ] [58])
(sign_extend:DI (reg:SI 77 [ D.2153 ]))) 115 {extendsidi2_rex64} (nil)
(nil))
test.cc:10: internal compiler error: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at
recog.c:2002
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24849
[Bug c++/24849] [gomp] ICE in expand_expr_real_1
--- Comment #1 from martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de 2005-11-14 15:14 --- gcc version 4.1.0-gomp-20050608-branch 20051109 (experimental) (merged 20051109) BTW, it appears as if the compiler datestamp is not correctly updated on the gomp branch (it says 20051109, but there have been commits to the branch after that date). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24849
