[Bug c++/23046] New: ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[Bug c++/23046] New: ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dank at kegel dot com]

While testing gcc-4.1-20050716, I ran across the error

bar.cc: In static member function 'static std::string
Blort::ConstructFullName(const std::string&, const std::vector<std::string,
std::allocator<std::string> >*, const std::string&, Blort::TwoValuedEnumType)':
bar.cc:1214: internal compiler error: in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

This was reproducible with just -O2; no other compiler flags were needed
to get the ICE.  (-O wasn't enough.)

It might be hard to provide a sanitized testcase,
but I can try if that's needed to track this down.

-- 
           Summary: ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.1.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: dank at kegel dot com
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|c++                         |tree-optimization
           Keywords|                            |ice-on-valid-code


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|ICE in set_value_range, at  |[4.1 Regression] ICE in
                   |tree-vrp.c:191              |set_value_range, at tree-
                   |                            |vrp.c:191
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.1.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-24 13:37 -------
Hmm, nothing can be done without a testcase.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-25 21:41 -------
You might want to try delta:
 http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~dsw/
I use the following script with delta to reduce stuff like this:
#!/usr/bin/python
# Using delta debugging on GCC input
#import psyco
#from psyco.classes import *
import commands
import string
import sys

# Invoke GCC
(status, output) = commands.getstatusoutput("/Users/pinskia/local.c/libexec/gcc/powerpc-apple-
darwin7.9.0/4.1.0/cc1plus -quiet  --param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0 
-Wfatal-errors %s 2>&1" % sys.argv[1])

# Determine outcome
if status == 0:
  sys.exit(1)
elif string.find(output, "finish_compound_stmt") >= 0:
  sys.exit(0)
else:
  sys.exit(1)

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[falk at debian dot org]

------- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org  2005-07-29 22:20 -------
waiting for testcase...

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dank at kegel dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com  2005-08-01 07:45 -------
yup.  I hope to try out 'delta' soon.

BTW it appears to be x86_64 specific.  ppc and pentium didn't seem to show it.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-04 18:31 -------
Confirmed, reducing a little further.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2005-08-04 18:31:51
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-04 18:43 -------
Reduced testcase:
enum eumtype { ENUM1, ENUM2 };
void g(const eumtype kind );
void f(long i);
void g(const eumtype kind)
{
  if ((kind != ENUM1) && (kind != ENUM2))
    f(kind);
}


--- the tree before VRP:
void g(eumtype) (kind)
{
  long int kind.0;

<bb 0>:
  if (kind_1 > 1) goto <L0>; else goto <L1>;

<L0>:;
  kind.0_2 = (long int) kind_1;
  f (kind.0_2);

<L1>:;
  return;

}


-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |phython at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org, dnovillo at gcc dot gnu
                   |                            |dot org
   Last reconfirmed|2005-08-04 18:31:51         |2005-08-04 18:43:23
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dank at kegel dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com  2005-08-04 19:18 -------
In general, once a ten-line testcase is found, do these get added
to the gcc regression testsuite as a matter of course?

We would be happy to submit patches to add these to the test suite, but 
we don't have copyright assignments in.  Let us know if we
should submit such patches anyway.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[phython at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-04 19:22 -------
 When the patch that fixes a bug is put into GCC the testcases go in as well.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-04 19:23 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> In general, once a ten-line testcase is found, do these get added
> to the gcc regression testsuite as a matter of course?

In general once the fix is found, it will be added to the testsuite.
If it was already fixed, it will be added.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dnovillo at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com  2005-08-04 19:24 -------
Subject: Re:  [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 07:18:13PM -0000, dank at kegel dot com wrote:

> In general, once a ten-line testcase is found, do these get added
> to the gcc regression testsuite as a matter of course?
> 
No.  Only after a fix has been created for the failure.

> We would be happy to submit patches to add these to the test suite, but 
> we don't have copyright assignments in.  Let us know if we
> should submit such patches anyway.
> 
I don't know whether test cases require copyright assignments.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-05 13:30 -------

Can't reproduce with mainline as of 2005-08-04.  Could you try again?


-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WORKSFORME


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |dot org                     |org
             Status|REOPENED                    |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-05 13:36 -------

Bah.  My compiler had checking disabled.  Sorry about that.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WORKSFORME                  |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[phython at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-05 14:49 -------
I patched fold to change if (FOO > TYPE_MAX) or if (FOO < TYPE_MIN) to if (0)
and this fixes the ice.  I'll mail the patch when I get back from work tonight.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-05 16:46 -------
(In reply to comment #14)
> I patched fold to change if (FOO > TYPE_MAX) or if (FOO < TYPE_MIN) to if (0)
> and this fixes the ice.  I'll mail the patch when I get back from work tonight.

That was my idea too, but it may not be as easy as it looks.  See Roger's
response to my message http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-08/msg00169.html.

The problem now is that VRP will either need to treat the range as VARYING or do
some trickery to fold that conditional.  For 4.1 it is probably easier to just
set the range to VARYING.


-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-05 17:39 -------

James has a potential fix for fold.  If that doesn't work, a simple change to
extract_range_from_assert_expr should provide a similar effect.  However, the
real problem in this PR is fold() not doing its job.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot |phython at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |org                         |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[dank at kegel dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com  2005-08-29 15:34 -------
I think Jim's fold fix/workaround is at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-08/msg00371.html 
I'm using it locally now, and it seems at first glance
to get us past this problem.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046

[Bug tree-optimization/23046] [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:191

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |23968
              nThis|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23046