https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
--- Comment #3 from Nicholas Krause <xerofoify at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2)
> (In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #1)
> > Hi Marin,
> > I've not sure if this is correct but it does not ICE with this fix:
> > tree off = fold_convert (ptr_type_node, op1);
> > - return build_fold_addr_expr_loc
> > - (loc,
> > + return build1_loc
> > + (loc, ADDR_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (op0),
> > fold_build2 (MEM_REF,
> > TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (op0)),
> > unshare_expr (op0), off));
> >
> > should actually be:
> > (EXPR_LOCATION(off), ADDR_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (op0),
> > fold_build2 (MEM_REF,
> > TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (op0)),
> > unshare_expr (op0), off));
>
> Huh? Why do you think that changing the location should fix the ICE?
> That's a completely random change that you never bothered to test, because
> it doesn't fix the crash.
Here is my exact output of testing the change:
[xerofoify@gcc2-power8 bin]$ ./g++ star.ii -c -flto -O2 -o x.o && ./gcc -shared
x.o
star.ii: In member function ‘int B< <template-parameter-1-1>,
<template-parameter-1-2>, <template-parameter-1-3>, <template-parameter-1-4>,
<template-parameter-1-5> >::_S_key()’:
star.ii:9:19: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void
[-Wreturn-type]
9 | int _S_key() { }
| ^
star.ii: In member function ‘int B< <template-parameter-1-1>,
<template-parameter-1-2>, <template-parameter-1-3>, <template-parameter-1-4>,
<template-parameter-1-5> >::_M_insert_(int*, int*, _Arg&&, _NodeGen&)’:
star.ii:24:1: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void
[-Wreturn-type]
24 | }
| ^
If you look at the revision mentioned for this bug in gimple-fold.c here:
tree off = fold_convert (ptr_type_node, op1);
- return build_fold_addr_expr_loc
- (loc,
+ return build1_loc
+ (loc, ADDR_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (op0),
that's incorrect as loc is not the tree we want but off and from that the
EXPR_LOCATION of that tree. Does that make more sense now?
