[Bug debug/39086] New: Failing assert in dwarf2out.c:5770 when compiling with -fno-tree-sra
When compiling test 27_io/basic_istream/requirements/explicit_instantiation.cc from the libstc++ testsuite and adding the -fno-tree-sra flag, I get the following error: -- u...@host:~/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/testsuite$ $HOME/gcc/svn/obj/./gcc/g++ -shared-libgcc -B$HOME/gcc/svn/obj/./gcc -nostdinc++ -L$HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src -L$HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs -B$HOME/gcc/inst/svn//i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -B$HOME/gcc/inst/svn//i686-pc-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem $HOME/gcc/inst/svn//i686-pc-linux-gnu/include -isystem $HOME/gcc/inst/svn//i686-pc-linux-gnu/sys-include -g -O2 -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERT -fmessage-length=0 -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -g -O2 -D_GNU_SOURCE -g -O2 -D_GNU_SOURCE -DLOCALEDIR=. -nostdinc++ -I$HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/i686-pc-linux-gnu -I$HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include -I$HOME/gcc/svn/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++ -I$HOME/gcc/svn/libstdc++-v3/include/backward -I$HOME/gcc/svn/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/util $HOME/gcc/svn/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/basic_istream/requirements/explicit_instantiation.cc -include bits/stdc++.h -S -o explicit_instantiation.s -fno-tree-sra In file included from $HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/istream:833, from $HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/sstream:44, from $HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/complex:52, from $HOME/gcc/svn/libstdc++-v3/include/precompiled/stdc++.h:69: $HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/istream.tcc: In member function 'typename std::basic_istream_CharT, _Traits::int_type std::basic_istream_CharT, _Traits::get() [with _CharT = __gnu_cxx::characterunsigned char, __gnu_test::pod_int, __gnu_test::pod_state, _Traits = std::char_traits__gnu_cxx::characterunsigned char, __gnu_test::pod_int, __gnu_test::pod_state ]': $HOME/gcc/svn/obj/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/istream.tcc:222: internal compiler error: in decl_ultimate_origin, at dwarf2out.c:5770 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. -- This is with trunk revision 143890, compiled on i686-pc-linux without bootstrap. I will attach preprocessed source shortly. -- Summary: Failing assert in dwarf2out.c:5770 when compiling with - fno-tree-sra Product: gcc Version: 4.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: debug AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39086
[Bug debug/39086] Failing assert in dwarf2out.c:5770 when compiling with -fno-tree-sra
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:09 --- Created an attachment (id=17232) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17232action=view) Preprocessed source Enough to compile with -O2 -g -fno-tree-sra explicit_instantiation.ii -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39086
[Bug debug/39086] Failing assert in dwarf2out.c:5770 when compiling with -fno-tree-sra
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:56 --- Created an attachment (id=17236) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17236action=view) Preprocessed source OK, this one is hopefully without any precompiled headers. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #17232|0 |1 is obsolete|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39086
[Bug middle-end/32964] [4.3/4.4 Regression] union cause inefficient code inside loops
--- Comment #13 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-06 21:45 --- Indeed, this testcase is fully scalarized by the new SRA even as it is today. (If you don't know what new SRA I mean, I hope I'll post it to the list as an RFC next week). -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32964
[Bug tree-optimization/39259] [4.4 Regression] internal compiler error: in initialize_cfun, at tree-inline.c:1749
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-23 14:09 ---
I don't understand the comment above the assert at all (Honza probably
does) and so this might not be the correct approach but the following
patch should just obviously work. At least it does for this testcase
and I am about to bootstrap and regression test it:
2009-02-23 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
* tree-inline.c (tree_versionable_function_p): Return false for
functions calling setjmp or alloca.
Index: tree-inline.c
===
--- tree-inline.c (revision 144380)
+++ tree-inline.c (working copy)
@@ -4174,12 +4174,17 @@ copy_static_chain (tree static_chain, co
bool
tree_versionable_function_p (tree fndecl)
{
+ struct function *fn_cfun;
if (fndecl == NULL_TREE)
return false;
/* ??? There are cases where a function is
uninlinable but can be versioned. */
if (!tree_inlinable_function_p (fndecl))
return false;
+
+ fn_cfun = DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (fndecl);
+ if (fn_cfun-calls_setjmp || fn_cfun-calls_alloca)
+return false;
return true;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39259
[Bug tree-optimization/39259] [4.4 Regression] internal compiler error: in initialize_cfun, at tree-inline.c:1749
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-24 13:44 --- After discussion with Honza, I have tried a more complex approach, the patch is at: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-02/msg01118.html -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-02-21 17:56:56 |2009-02-24 13:44:34 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39259
[Bug tree-optimization/39259] [4.4 Regression] internal compiler error: in initialize_cfun, at tree-inline.c:1749
--- Comment #8 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-25 18:19 --- Fixed with: Author: jamborm Date: Wed Feb 25 17:34:40 2009 New Revision: 144428 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=144428 Log: 2009-02-25 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz * tree-inline.c (initialize_cfun): Remove asserts for calls_setjmp and alls_alloca function flags. (copy_bb): Set calls_setjmp and alls_alloca function flags if such calls are detected. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/torture/pr39259.C Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-inline.c -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39259
[Bug middle-end/37861] [4.3 Regression] Bogus array bounds warning
--- Comment #12 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-28 00:30 --- I have just posted a patch to fix this issue on the 4.3 branch to the mailing list: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-02/msg01245.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37861
[Bug middle-end/37861] [4.3 Regression] Bogus array bounds warning
--- Comment #13 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-28 18:33 --- Subject: Bug 37861 Author: jamborm Date: Sat Feb 28 18:33:27 2009 New Revision: 144491 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=144491 Log: 2009-02-28 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz Backport from mainline: 2008-12-02 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR middle-end/37861 * tree-ssa-forwprop.c (forward_propagate_addr_into_variable_array_index): Check that the offset is not computed from a MULT_EXPR if element size is one. Modified: branches/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37861
[Bug middle-end/37861] [4.3 Regression] Bogus array bounds warning
--- Comment #14 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-28 22:46 --- Fixed with revision 144491: te: Sat Feb 28 18:33:27 2009 New Revision: 144491 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=144491 Log: 2009-02-28 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz Backport from mainline: 2008-12-02 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR middle-end/37861 * tree-ssa-forwprop.c (forward_propagate_addr_into_variable_array_index): Check that the offset is not computed from a MULT_EXPR if element size is one. Modified: branches/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_3-branch/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37861
[Bug tree-optimization/40081] verify_stmts failed with -O2
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 10:29 --- New SRA handles this fine by not scalarizing anything that has volatile fields in it. There is already a fortran testcase with a union with a volatile field that made me aware of this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40081
[Bug middle-end/40122] missed optimization when using union of __m128i and int[4]
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-21 16:02 ---
With he new SRA, the optimized dump looks like:
D.6886_10 = {1, 1, 1, 1};
D.6887_11 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRvector long long int(D.6886_10);
D.6893_12 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRvector int(D.6887_11);
D.6891_14 = __builtin_ia32_pcmpeqd128 (D.6893_12, D.6893_12);
D.6890_15 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRvector long long int(D.6891_14);
D.6897_16 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRvector char(D.6890_15);
D.6896_17 = __builtin_ia32_pmovmskb128 (D.6897_16);
D.6933_21 = D.6896_17 != 65535;
return D.6933_21;
x is completely gone.
The (relevant) assembly output is
main:
movdqa .LC0, %xmm0
pcmpeqd %xmm0, %xmm0
pmovmskb%xmm0, %eax
cmpl$65535, %eax
pushl %ebp
setne %al
movl%esp, %ebp
movzbl %al, %eax
popl%ebp
ret
So even though I don't really understand the SSE instructions I
believe the new SRA does indeed help. I'll add a testcase checking
that x vanishes to the patch series as I am finalizing the final patch
set now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40122
[Bug tree-optimization/40323] [4.5 Regression] compiling just takes forever and doesn't really process
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-02 10:51 --- Apparently I was not careful enough when turning an if branch to a while loop. I'll prepare and test a patch straight away. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-06-02 10:45:24 |2009-06-02 10:51:47 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40323
[Bug tree-optimization/40323] [4.5 Regression] compiling just takes forever and doesn't really process
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-02 17:06 --- Created an attachment (id=17946) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17946action=view) Fix Ok, creating a simple testcase was not easy for me but here is a patch that includes one (and fixes the original issue too). It still needs testing but I am quite confident it will pass. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40323
[Bug tree-optimization/40323] [4.5 Regression] compiling just takes forever and doesn't really process
--- Comment #8 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-03 11:56 --- Subject: Bug 40323 Author: jamborm Date: Wed Jun 3 11:56:05 2009 New Revision: 148126 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148126 Log: 2009-06-03 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/40323 * ipa-prop.c (get_ssa_def_if_simple_copy): Break if not single assignment. * testsuite/g++.dg/torture/pr40323.C: New file. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/torture/pr40323.C Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/ipa-prop.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40323
[Bug tree-optimization/40323] [4.5 Regression] compiling just takes forever and doesn't really process
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-03 12:54 --- I have just verified this is fixed on the current trunk. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40323
[Bug tree-optimization/40351] [4.5 Regression] ice in generate_subtree_copies for Linux kernel build
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-05 15:48 --- Created an attachment (id=17955) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17955action=view) Fix This patch fixes this problem. I'll post it to the mailing list once I get to bootstrap it which may take a while now. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40351
[Bug middle-end/32950] [4.5 regression] ICE with __complex__ double
--- Comment #15 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-07 14:41 --- (In reply to comment #11) It is caused by revision 147980: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-05/msg00959.html Revision 147978 also does not work if you compile the testcase with the -fno-tree-sra switch. New SRA uncovers this problem because it sees the structure containing only a single field always accessed as a structure and never as a scalar and so does not scalarize it. Something goes wrong later on, probably when expanding to RTL. Unfortunately, I cannot help fixing that. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32950
[Bug c/40378] ICE starting with revision 147980
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-08 13:27 --- This is obviously mine. Will look into it shortly. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-06-08 13:27:52 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40378
[Bug middle-end/32950] [4.5 regression] ICE with __complex__ double
--- Comment #17 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-08 17:49 --- (In reply to comment #16) Wait, (In reply to comment #15) (In reply to comment #11) It is caused by revision 147980: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-05/msg00959.html Revision 147978 also does not work if you compile the testcase with the -fno-tree-sra switch. New SRA uncovers this problem because it sees the structure containing only a single field always accessed as a structure and never as a scalar and so does not scalarize it. Something goes wrong later on, probably when expanding to RTL. Unfortunately, I cannot help fixing that. I think that should always scalarize as it is a single field as it is always better to scalarize single field structs (except maybe bitfield ones). Well, Richi seems to disagree: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg00637.html I am not sure myself, I believe that there are not so many cases in which this would prove beneficial. When there are no operations performed on the scalars, the only situation I can think of would be some extensive copy propagation. Martin -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32950
[Bug tree-optimization/40351] [4.5 Regression] ice in generate_subtree_copies for Linux kernel build
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-09 16:53 --- Subject: Bug 40351 Author: jamborm Date: Tue Jun 9 16:52:57 2009 New Revision: 148315 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148315 Log: 2009-06-09 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/40351 * tree-sra.c (propagate_subacesses_accross_link): Check that a refrence to a potential artifical subaccess can be constructed. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr40351.c: New file. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr40351.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40351
[Bug tree-optimization/40351] [4.5 Regression] ice in generate_subtree_copies for Linux kernel build
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-09 20:59 --- Fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40351
[Bug tree-optimization/40413] [4.5 Regression] Internal error in connection with optimization and allocatable objects
--- Comment #8 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-14 01:30 --- Mine, will look into it shortly. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-06-12 05:20:52 |2009-06-14 01:30:09 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40413
[Bug rtl-optimization/33928] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] 30% performance slowdown in floating-point code caused by r118475
--- Comment #94 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-14 04:43 --- (In reply to comment #92) In the meanwhile something caused tree incremental SSA to jump up from 10s to 26s. Sob. (In reply to comment #93) I would say that was the new SRA. OK, I'll try to investigate. Which of the various attachments to this bug is the one to look at? Martin -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33928
[Bug tree-optimization/40432] [4.5 Regression] verify_stmts failed with -O2: non-register as LHS of unary operation
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-14 04:55 --- (In reply to comment #1) I want to say the SRA changes caused this ... Yes it did. I can reproduce it and it should not be difficult to fix. However, I'll have a look at why SRA constructs such a statement in the first place. The code that does it currently things it's either appending .eh to the LHS or the VCE to the RHS, not both. But maybe it's just an oversight, I'll check in the morning. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-06-14 04:55:06 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40432
[Bug tree-optimization/40413] [4.5 Regression] Internal error in connection with optimization and allocatable objects
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-15 09:07 --- Created an attachment (id=18001) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18001action=view) Fix This was quite a serious oversight on my part, I wonder how it went for so long unnoticed. I am about to bootstrap and regression test this patch and will submit it if both succeed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40413
[Bug tree-optimization/40432] [4.5 Regression] verify_stmts failed with -O2: non-register as LHS of unary operation
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-15 09:09 --- Created an attachment (id=18002) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18002action=view) Fix OK, the statement is fine except that it is not gimple ;-). Fixed with this patch, I will submit it if it passes bootstrap and testing. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40432
[Bug tree-optimization/40413] [4.5 Regression] Internal error in connection with optimization and allocatable objects
--- Comment #10 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-16 09:54 --- Bootstrap and testing passed, submitted in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg01179.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40413
[Bug tree-optimization/40432] [4.5 Regression] verify_stmts failed with -O2: non-register as LHS of unary operation
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-16 09:57 --- Bootstrapped, tested, submitted in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg01182.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40432
[Bug tree-optimization/40413] [4.5 Regression] Internal error in connection with optimization and allocatable objects
--- Comment #11 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-16 10:12 --- Subject: Bug 40413 Author: jamborm Date: Tue Jun 16 10:11:55 2009 New Revision: 148520 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148520 Log: 2009-06-16 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/40413 * tree-sra.c (load_assign_lhs_subreplacements): Pass offset to build_ref_for_offset. (propagate_subacesses_accross_link): Fix a typo in a comment. * testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/pr40413.f90: New file. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/pr40413.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40413
[Bug tree-optimization/40432] [4.5 Regression] verify_stmts failed with -O2: non-register as LHS of unary operation
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-16 10:16 --- Subject: Bug 40432 Author: jamborm Date: Tue Jun 16 10:16:40 2009 New Revision: 148522 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148522 Log: 2009-06-16 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/40432 * tree-sra.c (sra_modify_assign): When creating VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, check whether we need to force gimple register operand. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr40432.c: New file. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr40432.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40432
[Bug tree-optimization/40432] [4.5 Regression] verify_stmts failed with -O2: non-register as LHS of unary operation
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-16 10:24 --- Fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40432
[Bug tree-optimization/40413] [4.5 Regression] Internal error in connection with optimization and allocatable objects
--- Comment #12 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-16 10:24 --- Fixed -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40413
[Bug c++/40492] [4.5 Regression] ice in create_tmp_var
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-19 13:14 --- (In reply to comment #2) Confirmed. Caused by new SRA - we are creating a temporary with TREE_ADDRESSABLE type. Again? Well, let me see where... -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-06-19 12:37:49 |2009-06-19 13:14:43 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40492
[Bug c++/40492] [4.5 Regression] ice in create_tmp_var
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-19 17:27 --- Created an attachment (id=18025) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18025action=view) Fix The offset we pass to build_ref_for_offset in sra_modify_assign does not make any sense. I am about to bootstrap and test the attached patch which fixes this problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40492
[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-19 18:09 --- I will look into this next week. However, I have never compiled binutils before, so unless it is obvious, please describe how to reproduce the problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493
[Bug c++/40492] [4.5 Regression] ice in create_tmp_var
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 10:54 --- Subject: Bug 40492 Author: jamborm Date: Mon Jun 22 10:54:16 2009 New Revision: 148787 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148787 Log: 2009-06-22 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/40492 * tree-sra.c (sra_modify_assign): Pass zero offsets to build_ref_for_offset. * testsuite/g++.dg/torture/pr40492.C: New test. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40492
[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 18:57 --- Right, now I can reproduce the problem and it indeed is introduced by the new SRA commit. None of the fixes I have done so far deals with this one either. I am investigating this further (but don't hold your breath, it is going to take me a while). -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-06-22 18:57:00 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493
[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils
--- Comment #10 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 13:21 --- The miscompiled file seems to be gas/tc-i386.o. Early SRA is enough to trigger the problem. Digging deeper... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493
[Bug c++/40492] [4.5 Regression] ice in create_tmp_var
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 14:12 --- Fixed -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40492
[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils
--- Comment #12 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 16:45
---
Reduced testcase:
extern void abort (void);
typedef union i386_operand_type
{
struct
{
unsigned int reg8:1;
unsigned int reg16:1;
unsigned int reg32:1;
unsigned int reg64:1;
unsigned int floatreg:1;
unsigned int regmmx:1;
unsigned int regxmm:1;
unsigned int regymm:1;
unsigned int control:1;
unsigned int debug:1;
unsigned int test:1;
unsigned int sreg2:1;
unsigned int sreg3:1;
unsigned int imm1:1;
unsigned int imm8:1;
unsigned int imm8s:1;
unsigned int imm16:1;
unsigned int imm32:1;
unsigned int imm32s:1;
unsigned int imm64:1;
unsigned int disp8:1;
unsigned int disp16:1;
unsigned int disp32:1;
unsigned int disp32s:1;
unsigned int disp64:1;
unsigned int acc:1;
unsigned int floatacc:1;
unsigned int baseindex:1;
unsigned int inoutportreg:1;
unsigned int shiftcount:1;
unsigned int jumpabsolute:1;
unsigned int esseg:1;
unsigned int regmem:1;
unsigned int mem:1;
unsigned int byte:1;
unsigned int word:1;
unsigned int dword:1;
unsigned int fword:1;
unsigned int qword:1;
unsigned int tbyte:1;
unsigned int xmmword:1;
unsigned int ymmword:1;
unsigned int unspecified:1;
unsigned int anysize:1;
} bitfield;
unsigned int array[2];
} i386_operand_type;
unsigned int x00, x01, y00, y01;
int main (int argc, char *argv[])
{
i386_operand_type a,b,c,d;
a.bitfield.reg16 = 1;
a.bitfield.imm16 = 0;
a.array[1] = 22;
b = a;
x00 = b.array[0];
x01 = b.array[1];
c = b;
y00 = c.array[0];
y01 = c.array[1];
d = c;
if (d.bitfield.reg16 != 1)
abort();
if (d.bitfield.imm16 != 0)
abort();
if (d.array[1] != 22)
abort();
return 0;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493
[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils
--- Comment #13 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-24 16:38 --- Fix submitted to the mailing list, pending maintainer approval: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg01918.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493
[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils
--- Comment #14 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-25 10:38 --- Subject: Bug 40493 Author: jamborm Date: Thu Jun 25 10:38:13 2009 New Revision: 148941 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148941 Log: 2009-06-25 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/40493 * tree-sra.c (sra_modify_expr): Correct BIT_FIELD_REF argument numbers. (enum unscalarized_data_handling): New type. (handle_unscalarized_data_in_subtree): Return what has been done. (load_assign_lhs_subreplacements): Handle left flushes differently. (sra_modify_assign): Use unscalarized_data_handling, simplified condition determining whether to remove the statement. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr40493.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr40493.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493
[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils
--- Comment #15 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-25 14:21 --- I have checked out trunk 148941, compiled binutils with it (configured with --disable-werror), ran the testsuite and there were no failures. Thus I consider this fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493
[Bug tree-optimization/40556] [4.5 Regression] ICE in IPA-CP with recursion
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 13:53 --- This is some sort of cgraph consistency check. Honza added it and he also said he will look into this :-) -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jh at suse dot cz http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40556
[Bug middle-end/40554] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148941 miscompiled 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 14:59 --- OK, I have finally managed to reproduce this and the patch does indeed result into a segfault. I will keep looking into this, even though probably won't be able to do much until Monday. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|mjambor at suse dot cz |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot ||org AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-06-26 14:59:53 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
[Bug middle-end/40554] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148941 miscompiled 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:08 --- The miscompiled file seems to be derivative_approximation.o -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
[Bug middle-end/40554] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148941 miscompiled 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-27 23:41 ---
I believe the following (but yet untested) patch fixes this issue.
I will bootstrap and test it once I have a testcase that is simple
enough to be put into the testsuite. I hope to do all of this on
Monday.
Index: mine/gcc/tree-sra.c
===
--- mine.orig/gcc/tree-sra.c2009-06-28 00:58:23.0 +0200
+++ mine/gcc/tree-sra.c 2009-06-28 01:00:34.0 +0200
@@ -1908,7 +1908,8 @@ sra_modify_expr (tree *expr, gimple_stmt
host_integerp (TREE_OPERAND (bfr, 2), 1))
{
chunk_size = tree_low_cst (TREE_OPERAND (bfr, 1), 1);
- start_offset = tree_low_cst (TREE_OPERAND (bfr, 2), 1);
+ start_offset = access-offset
+ + tree_low_cst (TREE_OPERAND (bfr, 2), 1);
}
else
start_offset = chunk_size = 0;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
[Bug tree-optimization/40582] [4.5 Regression] ice for non-trivial conversion at assignment with -O2
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-29 11:16 --- OK, I'll have a look at it after I am done with PR 40554. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-06-29 11:10:17 |2009-06-29 11:16:14 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40582
[Bug tree-optimization/40570] [4.5 Regression] ice in get_constraint_for_ptr_offset with -O3
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-29 11:22 --- I'm quite confident this is a cgraph bug = CCing honza. (I'll try to keep this on my radar but there are other issues for which I am certainly responsible now). -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jh at suse dot cz http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40570
[Bug tree-optimization/40582] [4.5 Regression] ice for non-trivial conversion at assignment with -O2
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-29 17:11 --- Created an attachment (id=18094) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18094action=view) Fix It turns out that build_ref_for_offset apparently needs to check for full type compatibility and node just for useless_conversions. It is used more generally but also in much stricter same-type conditions than I have originally intended to. I will test this fix (alongside with another one) overnight and submit it tomorrow if everything goes fine. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40582
[Bug tree-optimization/40582] [4.5 Regression] ice for non-trivial conversion at assignment with -O2
--- Comment #8 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-30 11:39 --- As you may have noticed, I changed the testcase a little bit so that it ICEs as my i386 desktop too. A freshly checked out trunk no longer does. So I believe this is indeed fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40582
[Bug middle-end/40554] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148941 miscompiled 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-30 11:44 --- When compiled with a freshly checked-out trunk the testcase no longer segfaults and gives exactly the same output as if compiled with trunk revision 147978 (i.e. just before my new SRA got in). So I consider this fixed and hope that various automated testers will agree. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
[Bug tree-optimization/41740] [4.5 Regression] ICE in ipcp_analyze_node, at ipa-cp.c:183
--- Comment #8 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-20 10:11 --- This looks like PR 40556. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|mjambor at suse dot cz |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41740
[Bug tree-optimization/41775] [4.5 Regression] IPA-SRA: ice in rewrite_stmt, at tree-into-ssa.c:1302
-- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-10-21 12:31:40 |2009-10-21 15:05:11 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41775
[Bug tree-optimization/41775] [4.5 Regression] IPA-SRA: ice in rewrite_stmt, at tree-into-ssa.c:1302
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-26 21:53 --- Created an attachment (id=18903) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18903action=view) Proposed fix Indeed, the users of build_ref_for_offset in ipa-prop.c and ipa-cp.c do not unshare the base expressions they should. I have looked at all other users and found that they either pass declarations or do their own unsharing and so decided to move the unsharing to build_ref_for_offset itself. The attached patch fixes the ICE when compiling the testcase, I am currently bootstrapping it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41775
[Bug lto/41767] assertion in tree-sra.c
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-27 13:59 --- The problem here is that build_ref_for_offset_1() cannot find a field corresponding to a replacement within its own aggregate. The field is identified by its offset (zero) and type. Unfortunately, types_compatible_p() claims that the type of the replacement (taken from the expression where it occurs) and the field at the offset are not compatible. I have added some dumps to the beginning of the function and got: -- picked field value Determining compatibility of types: Expected type (type of the scalar replacement): pointer_type 0xb7726514 type union_type 0xb772612c tree_node SI size integer_cst 0xb7687498 constant 32 unit size integer_cst 0xb7687284 constant 4 align 32 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0xb772612c fields field_decl 0xb76eee60 common type record_type 0xb7720b54 tree_common SI file b.h line 8 col 20 size integer_cst 0xb7687498 32 unit size integer_cst 0xb7687284 4 align 32 offset_align 128 offset integer_cst 0xb76872a0 constant 0 bit offset integer_cst 0xb7687700 constant 0 context union_type 0xb772612c tree_node chain field_decl 0xb76eef18 constructor pointer_to_this pointer_type 0xb7726514 unsigned SI size integer_cst 0xb7687498 32 unit size integer_cst 0xb7687284 4 align 32 symtab 0 alias set 4 canonical type 0xb7726514 Record field type: pointer_type 0xb7720e10 type union_type 0xb7720af0 tree_node SI size integer_cst 0xb7687498 constant 32 unit size integer_cst 0xb7687284 constant 4 align 32 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0xb7720af0 fields field_decl 0xb76eebdc common type record_type 0xb7720b54 tree_common SI file b.h line 8 col 20 size integer_cst 0xb7687498 32 unit size integer_cst 0xb7687284 4 align 32 offset_align 128 offset integer_cst 0xb76872a0 constant 0 bit offset integer_cst 0xb7687700 constant 0 context union_type 0xb7720af0 tree_node chain field_decl 0xb76eec94 constructor pointer_to_this pointer_type 0xb7720e10 unsigned SI size integer_cst 0xb7687498 32 unit size integer_cst 0xb7687284 4 align 32 symtab 0 alias set 3 canonical type 0xb7720e10 NOT compatible. -- I could workaround this and check whether all replacements can be located within their aggregates before creating them but that does not sound right. Instead I think that the bug is either somewhere in type merging or in types_compatible_p(). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41767
[Bug tree-optimization/41775] [4.5 Regression] IPA-SRA: ice in rewrite_stmt, at tree-into-ssa.c:1302
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-27 18:04 --- I have just sent the patch to the mailing list: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01625.html I had to change the testcase a bit so that it compiles on x86_64. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41775
[Bug lto/41767] assertion in tree-sra.c
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-27 18:39 ---
Hi,
(In reply to comment #7)
Maybe IPA SRA gets
those two types from unrelated places?
I believe they are quite elated. The body of the function is:
bb 2:
init = c_parser_initializer (0B); [return slot optimization]
init$value_5 = init.value;
finish_decl (0, 0, init$value_5, 0, 0);
return;
The expected type is type of the RHS of the second statement
init.value while the type I get is the type of value within init.
As I said the testcase has two incompatible variants of union tree_node and
they are obviously not merged and thus not compatible.
I was not sure whether you were implying that the input was invalid or
not. If it is and we want to avoid the ICE in the simplest possible
way, we can do so with the patch below. (Of course, we might try to
instead warn or fail in some nicer way when putting the individual
pieces from different files together.)
Index: mine/gcc/tree-sra.c
===
--- mine.orig/gcc/tree-sra.c
+++ mine/gcc/tree-sra.c
@@ -1644,7 +1644,13 @@ analyze_access_subtree (struct access *r
if (allow_replacements scalar !root-first_child
(root-grp_hint
- || (direct_read root-grp_write)))
+ || (direct_read root-grp_write))
+ /* If the user provided erroneous LTO intput, we might end up ICIng as
+in PR 41767. Prevent that by checking we can always find the part of
+the aggregate that corresponds to the replacement. */
+ (!in_lto_p
+ || build_ref_for_offset (NULL, TREE_TYPE (root-base),
+ root-offset, root-type, false)))
{
if (dump_file (dump_flags TDF_DETAILS))
{
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41767
[Bug tree-optimization/41750] [4.5 Regression] gcc 4.5.0 miscompiles binutils
--- Comment #19 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-27 18:45 --- I have downloaded binutils 2.20 and compiled the file on a native ia64 compiler. I have only managed to look at the dumps but so far could not see any problem there. I will have another look on Thursday. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-10-26 20:57:48 |2009-10-27 18:45:46 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41750
[Bug tree-optimization/41775] [4.5 Regression] IPA-SRA: ice in rewrite_stmt, at tree-into-ssa.c:1302
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-29 12:41 --- Subject: Bug 41775 Author: jamborm Date: Thu Oct 29 12:40:48 2009 New Revision: 153699 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=153699 Log: 2009-10-29 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/41775 * tree-sra.c (build_ref_for_offset): Unshare *expr if not NULL. (generate_subtree_copies): Do not unshare agg. (load_assign_lhs_subreplacements): Do not unshare rhs. (sra_modify_assign): Do not unshare exprs. (propagate_subacesses_accross_link): Renamed to propagate_subaccesses_across_link. * testsuite/g++.dg/torture/pr41775.C: New testcase. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/torture/pr41775.C Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41775
[Bug tree-optimization/41775] [4.5 Regression] IPA-SRA: ice in rewrite_stmt, at tree-into-ssa.c:1302
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-29 12:50 --- I did. This is now fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41775
[Bug tree-optimization/41750] [4.5 Regression] gcc 4.5.0 miscompiles binutils
--- Comment #21 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-29 13:44 --- (In reply to comment #20) I'm not sure, but by my impression that's a host issue, no? So, I doubt that working on target will get you any further. Perhaps, I don't know (or do you mean that you know that the native compiler does not have this problem?). I have also built a cross-compiler x86_64-ia64 but when I feed the attachment in comment #14 to it, it segfaults at -O2 regardless of -fno-ipa-sra (it segfaults at /home/jamborm/gcc/mine/gcc/config/ia64/ia64.c:7032). Nevertheless, I can get the IPA-SRA dump file from the cross compiler and it is (as I belive it should be) almost identical to the one from the native compiler and I still don't see any problem there. I admit that at the moment I am not sure what to look at next... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41750
[Bug tree-optimization/41750] [4.5 Regression] IPA-SRA is broken
--- Comment #24 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-30 18:22 --- Thanks for the simple testcase, it has certainly helped me. I have sent a patch to address this issue to the mailing list: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01814.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41750
[Bug tree-optimization/41750] [4.5 Regression] IPA-SRA is broken
--- Comment #25 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-02 14:14 --- Subject: Bug 41750 Author: jamborm Date: Mon Nov 2 14:13:49 2009 New Revision: 153809 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=153809 Log: 2009-11-02 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/41750 * tree-sra.c (analyze_modified_params): Loop over all representatives of components of a parameter. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr41750.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr41750.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41750
[Bug tree-optimization/41750] [4.5 Regression] IPA-SRA is broken
--- Comment #26 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-02 14:33 --- Tthis is now fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41750
[Bug lto/41932] LTO ICE when compiling ocaml trunk (incompatible type)
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-04 16:10 --- (In reply to comment #4) This is -O vs. -O2 ICE because different IPA passes are selected then. I think we have a dup for this - Martin, is it somehow easy to avoid the ICE? Well, it seems that calling ipa_initialize_node_params() rather than ipa_populate_param_decls() in ipa_update_after_lto_read() should avoid it. Moreover, if things can get this much out of sync, I'd also call ipa_check_create_node_params() and ipa_check_create_edge_args() at the beginning of ipa_update_after_lto_read() too, just to be sure. I have not tried any of the above but can prepare a patch along these lines... unless someone else is faster :-) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41932
[Bug lto/41932] LTO ICE when compiling ocaml trunk (incompatible type)
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 16:20 --- Proposed patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg00501.html -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|mjambor at suse dot cz |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41932
[Bug lto/42009] New: LTO unable to link in presence of multiple inheritance
The C++ testcase that I am about to attach compiles and links well without LTO at all optimizations levels. Unfortunately, whenever I try to compile it with LTO (at any optimization level including zero), I get the following link error: mjam...@host:~/gcc/fail$ ~/gcc/inst/trunk/bin/g++ -flto testcase.cpp /tmp/ccxMi1Vq.lto.o:(.rodata._ZTV1B[_ZTV1B]+0x18): undefined reference to `_ZThn16_N1B3fooEi' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status When I remove the first ancestor of class B from the list of ancestors, the testcase links and works fine. I get a very similar error on x86_64 too. On both machines the used compiler is pristine trunk revision 154038. -- Summary: LTO unable to link in presence of multiple inheritance Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42009
[Bug lto/42009] LTO unable to link in presence of multiple inheritance
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-11 14:40 --- Created an attachment (id=19004) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19004action=view) Testcase This is the testcase. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42009
[Bug lto/41932] LTO ICE when compiling ocaml trunk (incompatible type)
--- Comment #10 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-11 15:07 --- Subject: Bug 41932 Author: jamborm Date: Wed Nov 11 15:07:18 2009 New Revision: 154095 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154095 Log: 2009-11-11 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR lto/41932 * ipa-prop.c (ipa_update_after_lto_read): Call ipa_check_create_node_params and ipa_check_create_edge_args. Also call ipa_initialize_node_params instead of ipa_populate_param_decls. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/ipa-prop.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41932
[Bug lto/41932] LTO ICE when compiling ocaml trunk (incompatible type)
--- Comment #11 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-11 15:10 --- Basile, can you please confirm that this is now fixed? Thanks. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41932
[Bug middle-end/42025] [4.5 Regression] ICE verify_stmts failed (non-trivial conversion at assignment)
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-13 16:36 --- This seems to be IPA SRA and thus mine. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42025
[Bug middle-end/42025] [4.5 Regression] ICE verify_stmts failed (non-trivial conversion at assignment)
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-13 19:34 ---
Yep, this is definitely mine. Even though I have a fix for the above
testcase, it unfortunately does not work for my all-time favorite
one-filed structures, e.g.:
typedef struct
{
void *p;
} Ptr;
struct A
{
int i;
union
{
Ptr p;
char *q;
} u;
};
extern Ptr get_stuff (void);
extern void use_stuff (char *);
static void foo(struct A p, char *q)
{
if (p.i)
p.u.p = get_stuff ();
else
p.u.q = q;
use_stuff (p.u.q);
}
void bar(struct A *p, char *q)
{
foo(*p, q);
}
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot
|org |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42025
[Bug middle-end/42025] [4.5 Regression] ICE verify_stmts failed (non-trivial conversion at assignment)
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-13 21:13 --- Created an attachment (id=19012) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19012action=view) Proposed fix. Proposed fix I am currently bootstrapping. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42025
[Bug middle-end/42025] [4.5 Regression] ICE verify_stmts failed (non-trivial conversion at assignment)
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-21 22:57 --- Subject: Bug 42025 Author: jamborm Date: Sat Nov 21 22:56:36 2009 New Revision: 154413 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154413 Log: 2009-11-21 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR middle-end/42025 * tree-sra.c (access_precludes_ipa_sra_p): New function. (splice_param_accesses): Check all accesses by calling access_precludes_ipa_sra_p. (sra_ipa_modify_expr): Rename argument erite to dont_convert and do not convert types if it is true. (sra_ipa_modify_assign): Convert types in case of mismatch. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42025-1.c: New test. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42025-2.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42025-1.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42025-2.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42025
[Bug middle-end/42025] [4.5 Regression] ICE verify_stmts failed (non-trivial conversion at assignment)
--- Comment #8 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-21 23:43 --- Fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42025
[Bug tree-optimization/42154] [4.5 Regression] Wrong code from (early) SRA
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 14:01 --- I'm looking into this. This example shows why using access-expr to create new expressions is a dangerous thing to do, at least in some contexts (which I did not really realize until now). I'd better look at them all. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-11-23 14:01:46 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42154
[Bug tree-optimization/42154] [4.5 Regression] Wrong code from (early) SRA
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 22:19 --- Proposed patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg01311.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42154
[Bug tree-optimization/42154] [4.5 Regression] Wrong code from (early) SRA
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 10:56 --- Subject: Bug 42154 Author: jamborm Date: Tue Nov 24 10:56:14 2009 New Revision: 154493 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154493 Log: 2009-11-24 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/42154 * tree-sra.c (struct access): Added comments. (sra_modify_expr): Build references to the old aggregate with build_ref_for_offset instead of reusing access-expr. (load_assign_lhs_subreplacements): Likewise. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr42154.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr42154.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42154
[Bug tree-optimization/42154] [4.5 Regression] Wrong code from (early) SRA
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 10:58 --- Fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42154
[Bug bootstrap/42157] [4.5 regression] ICE building stage 1 libgcc on IRIX 5.3: SEGV in compare_access_positions
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 18:16 --- Can you please add a check before the qsort call (tree-sra.c, line 1407) whether all pointers in the access_vec seem OK or whether it is SRA that passes the invalid pointer to qsort? Nothing fancy, something as stupid as the loop below should do: for (i =0; i access_count; i++) gcc_assert (((unsigned) VEC_index (access_p, access_vec, i)) 0x1000); If it passes I can't see any other explanation but a bad qsort. If it doesn't we'll need to figure out how the bad pointers get there. I don't have access to the architecture so I can't try it myself. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42157
[Bug middle-end/41290] [4.5 regression] ICE: edge points to wrong declaration
--- Comment #11 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 12:00 --- I can't reproduce this with revision 154673. Maybe it is fixed already? (perhaps by a fix for PR 42151?) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41290
[Bug middle-end/42196] New: ICE when SRAing partial assigments to complex number
Not very surprisingly, I get ICEs at tree-sra.c:2148 when compiling
these two examples with the current trunk at -O[123] on x86-64-linux:
==
union U
{
double d;
__complex__ int c;
};
double gd;
extern double bar (union U);
double foo (int b, double d, int c1, int c2)
{
union U u;
double r;
if (b)
{
u.d = d;
r = u.d;
}
else
{
__real__ u.c = c1;
__imag__ u.c = c2;
r = bar (u);
}
return r;
}
==
union U
{
__complex__ int ci;
__complex__ float cf;
};
float gd;
extern float bar (union U);
float foo (int b, double f1, double f2, int c1, int c2)
{
union U u;
double r;
if (b)
{
__real__ u.cf = f1;
__imag__ u.cf = f2;
}
else
{
__real__ u.ci = c1;
__imag__ u.ci = c2;
}
r = bar (u);
return r;
}
==
Hopefully I know what needs to be done.
Martin
--
Summary: ICE when SRAing partial assigments to complex number
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42196
[Bug middle-end/42006] [4.5 Regression] Termination problem with -O2 and -O3
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 18:46 ---
I have started a bootstrap and check of the following (with a testcase
and change log and stuff...) which for some reason fixes this
(renaming introduces the mess, the code as is generated by IPA-SRA is OK):
Index: mine/gcc/tree-sra.c
===
--- mine.orig/gcc/tree-sra.c
+++ mine/gcc/tree-sra.c
@@ -3478,7 +3478,10 @@ get_replaced_param_substitute (struct ip
{
char *pretty_name = make_fancy_name (adj-base);
- repl = make_rename_temp (TREE_TYPE (adj-base), ISR);
+ repl = create_tmp_var (TREE_TYPE (adj-base), ISR);
+ if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (repl)) == COMPLEX_TYPE
+ || TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (repl)) == VECTOR_TYPE)
+ DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P (repl) = 1;
DECL_NAME (repl) = get_identifier (pretty_name);
obstack_free (name_obstack, pretty_name);
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42006
[Bug middle-end/42196] ICE when SRAing partial assigments to complex number
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 22:22 ---
Just for the record, this also fails, for similar reasons like the
second testcase above:
union U
{
__complex__ int ci;
__complex__ float cf;
};
float gd;
extern float bar (float, float);
float foo (int b, union U u)
{
float f1, f2, r;
if (b)
{
f1 = __real__ u.cf;
f1 = __imag__ u.cf;
}
else
{
f1 = __real__ u.ci;
f1 = __imag__ u.ci;
}
r = bar (f1, f2);
return r;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42196
[Bug middle-end/42006] [4.5 Regression] Termination problem with -O2 and -O3
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 22:34 --- Subject: Bug 42006 Author: jamborm Date: Fri Nov 27 22:34:40 2009 New Revision: 154715 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154715 Log: 2009-11-27 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR middle-end/42006 * tree-sra.c (get_replaced_param_substitute): Call create_tmp_var instead of create_tmp_var. Set DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P to one manually for vector and complex types. (get_adjustment_for_base): Describe return value in the comment. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr42006.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr42006.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42006
[Bug middle-end/42006] [4.5 Regression] Termination problem with -O2 and -O3
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 22:35 --- Fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42006
[Bug middle-end/42206] ipa-prop.c: use of uninitialised local data
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 10:36 --- What a stupid oversight, I'll prepare a patch straight away. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-11-28 16:31:16 |2009-11-30 10:36:59 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42206
[Bug middle-end/42206] ipa-prop.c: use of uninitialised local data
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 15:46 --- Subject: Bug 42206 Author: jamborm Date: Mon Nov 30 15:46:00 2009 New Revision: 154820 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154820 Log: 2009-11-30 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR middle-end/42206 * ipa-prop.c (ipa_write_node_info): Initialize note_count to zero. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/ipa-prop.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42206
[Bug middle-end/42206] ipa-prop.c: use of uninitialised local data
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 15:58 --- The variable is initialized now. Thanks for pointing it out. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42206
[Bug middle-end/42196] ICE when SRAing partial assigments to complex number
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 18:00 --- Subject: Bug 42196 Author: jamborm Date: Mon Nov 30 17:59:57 2009 New Revision: 154834 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154834 Log: 2009-11-30 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR middle-end/42196 * tree-sra.c (struct access): New field grp_different_types. (dump_access): Dump grp_different_types. (compare_access_positions): Prefer scalars and vectors over other scalar types. (sort_and_splice_var_accesses): Set grp_different_types if appropriate. (sra_modify_expr): Use the original also when dealing with a complex or vector group accessed as multiple types. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42196-1.c: New test. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42196-2.c: New test. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42196-3.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42196-1.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42196-2.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42196-3.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42196
[Bug middle-end/42196] ICE when SRAing partial assigments to complex number
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 18:16 --- Fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42196
[Bug tree-optimization/42231] [4.4 Regression] Wrong generated code when using a callback function (possible callback function inlining bug ?)
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 22:22 --- The lattices are OK per se. Lattices really only represent arguments of calls that are represented in the call graph. When there might be other calls that are not represented in the graph, the function body is cloned and the original should be used for those. But it appears it isn't. (In fact it is always cloned because that's how replacement with constants works.) Specifically, the problem is that the wrong version of callback is _inlined_ into CallFunctionRec. Since indirect inlining is not involved, I'm surprised that this indirect call is inlined. So it all comes down to the fact that we have a wrong edge in the call graph after ipa-cp. This happens in the following way: 1. CallFunctionRec is cloned because fun is constant. fun is replaced by callback in the call statement. It then calls rebuild cgraph_edges so that a call graph edge is created for the statement (among other things, I believe cgraph verifier mandates this). 2. callback is cloned. IPA-CP does a rather nasty trick when redirecting callers: It redirects all of them and then figures out later when it was wrong. However a clone calling a clone is considered always safe. That would be so, however, only if the edge we created in the previous cloning was also part of the call graph when we did our analysis. But we added it later. We do not have this issue in trunk at least since may because the clone is now virtual, has no body and so we do not rebuild outgoing call graph edges in this way. (In fact, for the sake of indirect inlining, we should be creating these edges too.) Anyway, my proposed fix would be to replace the call rebuild_cgraph_edges in ipcp_update_cloned_node with something that just adds new call graph edges and also marks the new ones as indirect. Then it would be enough to tell ipcp_update_callgraph to redirect these edges back to (hm, actually from) the original nodes as well. If there are no objections, I'll prepare a patch along these lines in the next few days. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jh at suse dot cz http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42231
[Bug tree-optimization/42237] [4.5 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 13:04 --- Right. IPA-SRA currently relies on that it can always replace a memory reference with a memory reference. But both sides of this assignment were originally one field structures turned into scalars and so the assumption does not hold. It seems I need to detect this particular case and handle at the same place where I fix types. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-12-01 11:14:34 |2009-12-01 13:04:45 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42237
[Bug tree-optimization/42237] [4.5 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 14:10 --- Created an attachment (id=19197) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19197action=view) Simple testcase A simple test case that exhibits this bug and ICEs on both i386 and x86_64. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42237
[Bug tree-optimization/42237] [4.5 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 14:47 --- Created an attachment (id=19198) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19198action=view) Patch dealing with such assignments I'm currently testing this patch to address the problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42237
[Bug tree-optimization/42237] [4.5 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 17:40 --- Subject: Bug 42237 Author: jamborm Date: Tue Dec 1 17:39:44 2009 New Revision: 154874 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154874 Log: 2009-12-01 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR tree-optimization/42237 * tree-sra.c (sra_ipa_modify_assign): Split gimple_reg_type assignments in between references into two. * testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42237.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42237.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42237
[Bug tree-optimization/42237] [4.5 Regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
--- Comment #10 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 17:49 --- Fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42237
[Bug bootstrap/42157] [4.5 regression] ICE building stage 1 libgcc: SEGV in compare_access_positions
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-07 14:15 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
The problem is that the comparison of types is not anti-symmetrical:
Looking at the code, I see that we don't stabilize the sort for
integers. Can you please try the following (and untested) patch?
Thanks.
Index: mine/gcc/tree-sra.c
===
--- mine.orig/gcc/tree-sra.c
+++ mine/gcc/tree-sra.c
@@ -1134,10 +1134,17 @@ compare_access_positions (const void *a,
TREE_CODE (f2-type) != COMPLEX_TYPE
TREE_CODE (f2-type) != VECTOR_TYPE)
return -1;
- /* Put the integral type with the bigger precision first. */
else if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (f1-type)
INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (f2-type))
- return TYPE_PRECISION (f1-type) TYPE_PRECISION (f2-type) ? -1 : 1;
+ {
+ if (TYPE_PRECISION (f1-type) == TYPE_PRECISION (f2-type))
+ /* Stabilize the sort. */
+ return TYPE_UID (f1-type) - TYPE_UID (f2-type);
+ else
+ /* Put the integral type with the bigger precision first. */
+ return TYPE_PRECISION (f1-type) TYPE_PRECISION (f2-type)
+ ? -1 : 1;
+ }
/* Put any integral type with non-full precision last. */
else if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (f1-type)
(TREE_INT_CST_LOW (TYPE_SIZE (f1-type))
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42157
