From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id E25943858297; Thu, 8 Sep 2022 13:58:35 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E25943858297 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1662645515; bh=EvtzrnGPwTm40FJTcKpetaguSxn9EaHAbhi595o9+Zc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=DbceRoHOP2eWmt0/wtDpSHORC8MegPA/ipe+ZOY21SQzj1CgMHjvUkdY1l9gCdqOW RpLRMJ3z/Y5ylnLF1DwjIVnaoZ9v0XARot8PM8ltsMzCawxU42luCl27fQKQrrZMS1 OCR7c+TkeAXROqfNFT4Y8ySYetcNaleWvOvV+ptU= From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/106878] [11/12/13 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed at -O2 with pointers and bitwise caluclation Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:58:35 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.4 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106878 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 53550 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D53550&action=3Dedit gcc13-pr106878-1.patch Ugh, this is a mess. The verifiers do allow BIT_AND_EXPR (intentionally for realignment) and BIT_{I,X}OR_EXPR (just because it is similar) on pointer types, but since r12-1608-g2f1686ff70b25f BIT_NOT_EXPR is rejected on pointers. I'm afraid allowing just BIT_AND_EXPR and disallowing BIT_{I,X}OR_EXPR or BIT_NOT_EXPR would be a lot of work, this patch is what I spotted during skimming of match.pd to make BIT_{AND,IOR,XOR}_EXPR work on pointer types a= nd not BIT_NOT_EXPR.=