https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #20 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c76b3f9e83353a4cd437ca137c1fb835c9b5c21f
commit r11-5443-gc76b3f9e83353a4cd437ca137c1fb835c9b5c21f
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #19 from Martin Liška ---
What a nice reduced test-case.
Btw. started to fail with r8-4962-g4aa458f2ac11aef0 with -O2 -fno-tree-free
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
int __attribute__((noipa))
foo (int flag, int *p)
{
int val = *p;
if (flag)
{
if (val != 1)
__builtin_unreachable ();
return 0;
}
int val2 = *p;
return val2 == 2;
}
int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
The issue is a bogus jump threading done in VRP2 caused by bogus range info on
the hoisted gimple_code (use->stmt).
tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c.137t.pre- # PT = nonlocal escaped null
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
Then you will see the following diff in optimized dump:
--- good2020-11-25 16:27:16.795544128 +0100
+++ bad 2020-11-25 16:26:59.723620747 +0100
@@ -17022,7 +17022,6 @@
;; Function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #15 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 49624
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49624=edit
debugging patch
All right it will be for Richi. I suspect it's a do_hoist_insertion.
reduced test-case:
$ cat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
Thank you Chris, I can really confirm that. Working on that..
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #13 from Chris Clayton ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #9)
> Ok, so the question is: does it reproduce with the current master or now?
Short answer: Yes, it does.
A build done this morning (after pulling the latest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #12 from Chris Clayton ---
Created attachment 49622
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49622=edit
git bisect log
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #11 from Chris Clayton ---
I've finished the bisect and landed at:
[chris:~/scratch/gcc-ICE/gcc]$ git bisect good
bd87cc14ebdb6789e067fb1828d5808407c308b3 is the first bad commit
commit bd87cc14ebdb6789e067fb1828d5808407c308b3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
There's only two relevant changes, both before the snapshot tested:
ec383f0bdb4077b744d493d02afff5f13f33029e and
d87ee7f1c9cd2ffa6302cdfd0686d72e5bb7463b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
Ok, so the question is: does it reproduce with the current master or now?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #8 from Chris Clayton ---
Sorry, my last comment contains an error. git bisect start... reported 7
bisections would be needed not that there were only 7 commits.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
--- Comment #7 from Chris Clayton ---
Yes, Richard's correct. I'm building from snapshot releases. That's why I used
the term "snapshot releases" in comment 4.
I've cloned git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git and am bisecting between
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Target|
17 matches
Mail list logo
