From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id BE0D93858C53; Fri, 17 Mar 2023 09:24:44 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BE0D93858C53
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1679045084;
	bh=adfhXheYBIVywia7ON11IT0Xv4KKIe3iyFaN/BlTUOo=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=y5dYkl5Os3uOhIU9lFJ/4/ED8xbW78tJ5/FFir3OpSIX7PF9JcJs37YHKQIBr1cbj
	 Cdc+G+UZjKjdBDoo4a6VdPLMHznltkPHXmy+71VOqvgzFNuJdA/iH8Ghxle82+kFn8
	 /MogeogSv1qqKovMPLN822vt/UnajSU/VzxF10z4=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/105554] [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE: in
 emit_block_move_hints, at expr.cc:1829 since r9-5509-g5928bc2ec06dd4e7
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 09:24:44 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-105554-4-YUKVI4Qehf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-105554-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-105554-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105554

--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #16)
> Ick - that's one of the worst place to do this ... what happens if we
> postpone setting DECL_RESULT/DECL_ARGUMENTS to after initialize_cfun
> (and remove the setting of them there)?

If DECL_RESULT is NULL, then allocate_struct_function will segfault.
I think if DECL_ARGUMENTS was NULL there, it would be ok with it.

But initialize_cfun starts with:
  if (!DECL_ARGUMENTS (new_fndecl))
    DECL_ARGUMENTS (new_fndecl) =3D DECL_ARGUMENTS (callee_fndecl);
  if (!DECL_RESULT (new_fndecl))
    DECL_RESULT (new_fndecl) =3D DECL_RESULT (callee_fndecl);
which makes it redundant with the only caller of it doing:
  DECL_RESULT (new_decl) =3D DECL_RESULT (old_decl);
  DECL_ARGUMENTS (new_decl) =3D DECL_ARGUMENTS (old_decl);
  initialize_cfun (new_decl, old_decl,
                   new_entry ? new_entry->count : old_entry_block->count);=