[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Known to work|| Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|4.3.6 |4.4.0 Known to fail|| --- Comment #18 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-27 11:36:28 UTC --- Fixed for 4.4.0.
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-22 18:12 --- GCC 4.3.5 is being released, adjusting target milestone. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.3.5 |4.3.6 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #16 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-04 12:29 --- GCC 4.3.4 is being released, adjusting target milestone. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.3.4 |4.3.5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #15 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-07-14 19:51 --- (In reply to comment #14) Bah. So this then becomes it would be interesting to know what fixed this on the gimple-tuples-branch ... Revision 134191 fixed this on gimple-tuples-branch. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #13 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-07-11 15:34 --- (In reply to comment #12) would be interesting to know what fixed this on the trunk. A binary search on trunk identified revision 138207 as the point that fixed this ICE. That revision is a large merge from gimple-tuples-branch. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-11 15:40 --- Bah. So this then becomes it would be interesting to know what fixed this on the gimple-tuples-branch ... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-10 12:18 --- would be interesting to know what fixed this on the trunk. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 22:20 --- *** Bug 39047 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dima at debian dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-31 00:08 --- Hm, we are remapping iftmp.1_6 = (struct A[0:n.0 + -1] *) D.1755_5 where the variable array pointer type contains in TYPE_SIZE_UNIT n.0_3 * 4 and n.0_3 is on the free list. I wonder how we end up with an SSA name there in the first place. Likely a tree sharing issue. TYPE_SIZE is (bit_size_type) SAVE_EXPR n.0 * 32 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 10:20 --- GCC 4.3.3 is being released, adjusting target milestone. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.3.3 |4.3.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #8 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-28 18:50
---
Shorter testcase without templates:
==
inline void* operator new[](__SIZE_TYPE__, void* p) throw() { return p; }
struct A
{
A() {}
int i;
};
struct B
{
static void foo(A *p, int n) { new(p) A[n]; }
B() { foo(p, 1); }
A* p;
};
B b;
==
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Keywords||monitored
Known to work|4.4.0 4.1.1 |4.4.0 4.1.1 4.2.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-19 22:57 --- We are remapping (gdb) up #4 0x08330b6c in remap_type_1 (type=0xb7d835b0, id=0xbfbe96a4) at /home/richard/src/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/tree-inline.c:403 403 walk_tree (TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (new), copy_body_r, id, NULL); which contains an SSA_NAME that is in the freelist. Both size and unit-size are expressions. iftmp.1_6 = (struct TestObjC[0:size.0 + -1] *) D.1854_5 it looks like that we do not gimplify all of the parameter types. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
[Bug tree-optimization/38072] [4.3 Regression] ICE during inlining of valid code
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-10 23:57 --- Confirmed, still fails today on 4.3 branch. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail||4.3.0 4.3.3 Known to work||4.4.0 4.1.1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2008-11-10 23:57:21 date|| Summary|ICE during inlining of valid|[4.3 Regression] ICE during |code|inlining of valid code Target Milestone|--- |4.3.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38072
