[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-13 Thread vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #10 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-11-13 08:04:35 UTC --- confirmed fixed in gcc version 4.8.0 20121113 (experimental) [trunk revision 193471] (GCC)

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-12 11:46:30 UTC --- Actually, that shorter testcase ICEs for a different reason. static inline float bar (float k, float j) { float l = 0.0f; if (k j) l = k;

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-12 15:12:20 UTC --- Created attachment 28668 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28668 gcc48-pr55281.patch Untested fix.

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2012-11-12 15:37:23 UTC --- regression removed by the patch at first sight performances are similar to 4.7.2, so also vectorization is ok

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-12 16:18:52 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) [ Using ?: with a vector condition ] I was surprised only C++ handles this and not C BTW. Sorry, I didn't have time to do a

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-12 16:23:29 UTC --- I'm just testing that, so I know it doesn't have side-effects. COND_EXPR handling which I've copied was doing the same thing. The reason for the

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-12 16:39:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) I'm just testing that, so I know it doesn't have side-effects. I meant: instead of testing, so the optimization still occurs

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-13 07:25:41 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Nov 13 07:25:36 2012 New Revision: 193471 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=193471 Log: PR

[Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3)

2012-11-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED