[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- In fact I only see the problem when configuring with --with-arch=haswell. It goes away if I remove that flag.
[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig --- I also cannot reproduce this.
[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2019-02-23 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- WORKSFORME on x86_64-apple-darwin18 r269156. It doesn't look as a gfortran bug.
[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Ah, yes, the ICE was obviously introduced with r269098.
[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de --- nOn Fri, 22 Feb 2019, janus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 > > --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to janus from comment #1) > > In any case, the ICE does not occur with gfortran 8.2.0, and I'm pretty sure > > it was not present on trunk in December. > > More specifically, I think it must have appeared after 2019-01-08. The assert was added with 2019-02-22 Richard Biener PR middle-end/87609 * cfghooks.h (dependence_hash): New typedef. (struct copy_bb_data): New type. (cfg_hooks::duplicate_block): Adjust to take a copy_bb_data argument. (duplicate_block): Likewise. * cfghooks.c (duplicate_block): Pass down copy_bb_data. (copy_bbs): Create and pass down copy_bb_data. * cfgrtl.c (cfg_layout_duplicate_bb): Adjust. (rtl_duplicate_bb): Likewise. * tree-cfg.c (gimple_duplicate_bb): If the copy_bb_data arg is not NULL remap dependence info.
[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to janus from comment #1) > In any case, the ICE does not occur with gfortran 8.2.0, and I'm pretty sure > it was not present on trunk in December. More specifically, I think it must have appeared after 2019-01-08.
[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Hum, I can't reproduce the failure, but yes, the assert is new. But I spotted an unrelated error in the patch...
[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code CC||rguenther at suse dot de Known to work||8.2.0 See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=79315 Known to fail||9.0 --- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- The test case itself is more than two years old (r245089). I haven't checked when it started failing. In any case, the ICE does not occur with gfortran 8.2.0, and I'm pretty sure it was not present on trunk in December.
