https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #36 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:01c2ce169a05c8e59c4182796876f7e0754e4b5c
commit r11-7393-g01c2ce169a05c8e59c4182796876f7e0754e4b5c
Author: Christophe Lyon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #34 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ea5a82df9ba0c9d23e386290d24fc920968a8695
commit r11-7360-gea5a82df9ba0c9d23e386290d24fc920968a8695
Author: Martin Sebor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #33 from Martin Sebor ---
Another fix:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-February/565736.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #32 from Martin Sebor ---
The "arg spec" attribute also needs to be removed from the function arguments.
Let me take care of that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #31 from Richard Biener ---
Looks like DECL_ARGUMENTS of the function refers to SSA names.
(gdb) p function->function_decl.arguments
$1 =
(gdb) p debug_tree ($1)
unit-size
align:8 warn_if_not_align:0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #29 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3599ecb6a0145a428def5314d2d67d2e5a88f3c4
commit r11-7301-g3599ecb6a0145a428def5314d2d67d2e5a88f3c4
Author: Martin Sebor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #28 from Martin Sebor ---
Follow-on patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-February/565545.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #26 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0718336a5284dd5b40fd6691a94d6be93a80f279
commit r11-7018-g0718336a5284dd5b40fd6691a94d6be93a80f279
Author: Martin Sebor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #25 from Martin Sebor ---
Patch v3: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/564411.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-09-23 00:00:00 |2021-1-22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #22 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #21 from Martin Liška ---
Just for the record, 'cava' package is also affected by this issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
>
> --- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka ---
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
>
> --- Comment #18 from Martin Sebor ---
> Let me explain how this works. The VLA bounds in function parameters are used
> in two ways:
> 1) in the
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
>
> --- Comment #18 from Martin Sebor ---
> Let me explain how this works. The VLA bounds in function parameters are used
> in two ways:
> 1) in the front end, to check function redeclarations involving arrays and
> VLAs
> for equivalence,
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #18 from Martin Sebor ---
Let me explain how this works. The VLA bounds in function parameters are used
in two ways:
1) in the front end, to check function redeclarations involving arrays and VLAs
for equivalence,
2) in the middle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
Well - you're the first to add nontrivial (non-constant) trees to attributes.
In GIMPLE all effects are supposed to be reflected in the IL and thus things
like
variable TYPE_SIZE or TYPE_MIN/MAX_VALUE are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #16 from Martin Sebor ---
The ICE in pr97133 mentions BIND_EXPR. It's still there, even after unsharing:
$ gcc -O2 -S -flto -shared -fPIC /src/gcc/master/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr88701.c
during IPA pass: modref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka ---
> I'm not sure I understand correctly what you mean by "avoiding the attribute
> for VLA types would likely also be good (are those handled in any reasonable
> way?)" As I explain in the thread at the link
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #14 from Martin Sebor ---
I submitted a simple patch to do the unsharing as the first step toward fixing
this bug here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-November/559770.html
I'm not sure I understand correctly what you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
unsharing the tree is correct AFAICS, avoiding the attribute for VLA types
would likely also be good (are those handled in any reasonable way?). Note
nothing will update those SSA names so they should not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
I have one more test-case that started to ICE since the same revision:
$ cat 3.i
int write_to_fftw_input_buffers_frames;
void write_to_fftw_input_buffers();
void write_to_fftw_input_buffers(short
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Unsharing the expression in the front end, before it's added to the attribute,
> prevents this ICE, but I wouldn't expect that to be necessary. From what
> little I know about how garbage collection in GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
To each declaration of a function with one or more VLA parameters the C front
end adds attribute access that includes the expressions that specify the
top-level variable bounds. So the declaration of main()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
Generally LTO is organized into a global stream containing types, decls etc.
and local streams containing funtion bodies and initializers.
Global stream thus can not contain references that are local to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vvinayag at arm dot com
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
I'm not at all familiar with this part of GCC so I'm not sure what needs to be
done here. It seems to me that the streamer is missing support for certain
trees under some conditions. It knows how to stream
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
*** Bug 97133 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
The ICE triggers when streaming the main_argc used in the variable bound
expression in char argv[main_argc + 1]. The bound is included in the attribute
access added to the declaration of main by the C front
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Target Milestone|---
40 matches
Mail list logo
