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 68C83385AC09; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 06:55:31 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 68C83385AC09
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1663052131;
	bh=YinwH4msuJqIE97RrkM7x+9pr2APMSFA6pd1rqXiGbU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:From;
	b=JSkCT1l2Apjq5t4xgRR0YuR1qPcoW6cXraWIBOvXbX3H1tyKltr0/4fXkFB/B6wGG
	 QB8Tk04t5UQTtj8343VB6RJqB7u2hdODvI29Bvi6z1KJl8rtqrHd+IgT0TBmW5KDZJ
	 rw/dbswNZqv3tm0A8B+zY0N/34rEntewskJDo7is=
From: "lutztonineubert at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/106921] New: [11/12.1] -O1 and -fipa-icf 
 -fpartial-inlining causes wrong code
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2022 06:55:29 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: lutztonineubert at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status
 bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-106921-4@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=3D106921

            Bug ID: 106921
           Summary: [11/12.1] -O1 and -fipa-icf  -fpartial-inlining causes
                    wrong code
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.3.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: lutztonineubert at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Short summary:

The following code returns 1 if compiled with -O2 (which is wrong) and does
return 0 if compiled without optimization.

```
#include <array>
#include <cstddef>
#include <exception>

#define GCC_VERSION (__GNUC__ * 10000 \
                     + __GNUC_MINOR__ * 100 \
                     + __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__)
static_assert(GCC_VERSION =3D=3D 110300);

template <size_t Bits>
class bitset {
 private:
  using word_t =3D size_t;
  static constexpr size_t bits_per_word =3D sizeof(word_t) * 8;
  static constexpr size_t number_of_words =3D (Bits / bits_per_word) + (((B=
its %
bits_per_word) =3D=3D 0) ? 0 : 1);

 public:
  bool all_first(size_t n) const {
    {
      if (n > Bits) {
#ifdef RETURN_INSTEAD_TERMINATE
        return false;
#else
        std::terminate();
#endif
      }
      size_t i =3D 0;
      for (; n > bits_per_word; n -=3D bits_per_word, i++) {
        if (words_[i] !=3D ~word_t{0}) {
          return false;
        }
      }
      word_t last_word =3D words_[i];
      for (; n !=3D 0; n--) {
        if ((last_word & 1) !=3D 1) {
          return false;
        }
        last_word >>=3D 1;
      }
      return true;
    }
  }

  void fill() noexcept {
      for (auto& word : words_) {
          word =3D ~word_t{0};
      }
  }

 private:
  std::array<word_t, number_of_words> words_{};
};

volatile int X =3D 0;

int main() {
  if (X =3D=3D 1) {
    bitset<123> bitset;
    static_cast<void>(bitset.all_first(123));
  } else {
    bitset<256> bitset;
    bitset.fill();
    if (!bitset.all_first(255)) {
      return 1;
    }
  }
  return 0;
}

```

See: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/bEexjrKP4

This issue does not exist in GCC 10 or GCC > 12.1. I couldn't test if it do=
es
work in GCC 11.3.1 (or the trunk of it).

Additional:
* I could also trigger the issue with -O1 -fipa-icf  -fpartial-inlining=20
* If we do a return false instead of a std::terminate, no wrong code is
generated.

I am sorry, but I couldn't reduced the code any further - this already took=
 so
much time to figure out it is a compiler bug.=