[Bug lto/113712] [11/12/13/14 Regression] lto crash: when building 641.leela_s peek with Example-gcc-linux-x86.cfg (SPEC2017 1.1.9) since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797

2024-02-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712

--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor  ---
I have access to the benchmark and building it with -fprofile-generate
it fails for me (with an ICE in add_symbol_to_partition_1) only when I
use -fno-use-linker-plugin and either -std=c++11 or -std=c++03. Using
-std=c++14 also avoids the issue.  In any event, -fno-use-linker-plugin
looks necessary.

[Bug lto/113712] [11/12/13/14 Regression] lto crash: when building 641.leela_s peek with Example-gcc-linux-x86.cfg (SPEC2017 1.1.9) since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797

2024-02-12 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712

--- Comment #19 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #18)
> (In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #17)
> > I've bisected this (using the test from Andrew Pinski) to
> > r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797
> 
> That's a coincidence, with -fno-ipa-sra the testcase fails even earlier,
> IPA-SRA was just hiding it, most probably by localizing some symbol before
> the linking stage.
> 
> Bugs that are only reproducible with -fno-use-linker-plugin are unlikely to
> get a high priority.  But I understand that the original issue does not need
> it?

I am not 100% sure if the original reported issue had been using the LTO plugin
because I could not reproduce it when using the plugin. 

> 
> (Also, the issue is supposed to be reproducible ton x86_64-linux, right?)

Yes it is supposed to be reproducible on x86_64; I reduced it there.

[Bug lto/113712] [11/12/13/14 Regression] lto crash: when building 641.leela_s peek with Example-gcc-linux-x86.cfg (SPEC2017 1.1.9) since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797

2024-02-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712

--- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor  ---
(In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #17)
> I've bisected this (using the test from Andrew Pinski) to
> r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797

That's a coincidence, with -fno-ipa-sra the testcase fails even earlier,
IPA-SRA was just hiding it, most probably by localizing some symbol before the
linking stage.

Bugs that are only reproducible with -fno-use-linker-plugin are unlikely to get
a high priority.  But I understand that the original issue does not need it?

(Also, the issue is supposed to be reproducible ton x86_64-linux, right?)