[Bug tree-optimization/111495] [14 regression] ICE in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 when building LLVM 17.0.1 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2d6e8

2023-09-21 Thread sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111495 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/111495] [14 regression] ICE in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 when building LLVM 17.0.1 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2d6e8

2023-09-21 Thread guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111495 --- Comment #5 from Jiu Fu Guo --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > I suspect r14-4192-g4d80863d7f93c0a839d1fe5 fixed this ... Yes, I reproduced this issue on ppc64le, and the fix r14-4192 seems to work fine.

[Bug tree-optimization/111495] [14 regression] ICE in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 when building LLVM 17.0.1 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2d6e8

2023-09-21 Thread sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111495 --- Comment #4 from Sam James --- trying..

[Bug tree-optimization/111495] [14 regression] ICE in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 when building LLVM 17.0.1 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2d6e8

2023-09-21 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111495 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I suspect r14-4192-g4d80863d7f93c0a839d1fe5 fixed this ...