[Bug c/104510] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed: mismatching comparison operand types in verify_gimple_in_seq()

2022-02-16 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104510

--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6e74122f0de6748b3fd0ed9183090cd7c61fb53e

commit r12-7256-g6e74122f0de6748b3fd0ed9183090cd7c61fb53e
Author: Jakub Jelinek 
Date:   Wed Feb 16 09:25:55 2022 +0100

c-family: Fix up shorten_compare for decimal vs. non-decimal float
comparison [PR104510]

The comment in shorten_compare says:
  /* If either arg is decimal float and the other is float, fail.  */
but the callers of shorten_compare don't expect anything like failure
as a possibility from the function, callers require that the function
promotes the operands to the same type, whether the original selected
*restype_ptr one or some shortened.
So, if we choose not to shorten, we should still promote to the original
*restype_ptr.

2022-02-16  Jakub Jelinek  

PR c/104510
* c-common.cc (shorten_compare): Convert original arguments to
the original *restype_ptr when mixing binary and decimal float.

* gcc.dg/dfp/pr104510.c: New test.

[Bug c/104510] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed: mismatching comparison operand types in verify_gimple_in_seq()

2022-02-14 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104510

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Created attachment 52439
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52439&action=edit
gcc12-pr104510.patch

Untested fix.  Callers don't expect shorten_compare to ever fail, even when it
returns NULL it still should convert arguments at least to the original
*restype_ptr.

[Bug c/104510] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed: mismatching comparison operand types in verify_gimple_in_seq()

2022-02-14 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104510

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Started with r5-4736-g1e51d0a29dbfebe6c0df58739562644c1a50f3c3

[Bug c/104510] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed: mismatching comparison operand types in verify_gimple_in_seq()

2022-02-14 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104510

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug c/104510] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed: mismatching comparison operand types in verify_gimple_in_seq()

2022-02-12 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104510

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to fail||5.1.0
Summary|ICE: 'verify_gimple'|[9/10/11/12 Regression]
   |failed: mismatching |ICE: 'verify_gimple'
   |comparison operand types in |failed: mismatching
   |verify_gimple_in_seq()  |comparison operand types in
   ||verify_gimple_in_seq()
  Known to work||4.9.0, 4.9.4
   Target Milestone|--- |9.5

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
This is a regression from GCC 4.9.0 which produced the correct trees even:


In GCC 5+:
  return (_Decimal32) f < d;


While in GCC 4.9.x:
  return (_Decimal64) f < (_Decimal64) d;