public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/106934] [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed since r9-5682-gef310a95a934d0f3 Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2022 06:41:44 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-106934-4-DqIqz2VPww@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-106934-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106934 Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Component|fortran |tree-optimization Keywords| |ice-checking, | |ice-on-valid-code --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- We are folding __builtin_memcpy (&transfer.0, &b, 1); to _12 = BIT_FIELD_REF <b_13(D), 8, 0>; MEM[(c_char * {ref-all})&transfer.0] = _12; where update_address_taken rewrites _12 = MEM[(c_char * {ref-all}&b]; to the BIT_FIELD_REF, exactly because the memory reference references QImode but the variable has HImode so we cannot use a VIEW_CONVERT to pun. The logic in update-address-taken doesn't match that of the verifier here, the variable is <var_decl 0x7ffff6523cf0 b type <boolean_type 0x7ffff653e0a8 logical(kind=2) public unsigned HI size <integer_cst 0x7ffff6517dc8 constant 16> unit-size <integer_cst 0x7ffff6517de0 constant 2> align:16 warn_if_not_align:0 symtab:0 alias-set -1 canonical-type 0x7ffff653e0a8 precision:1 min <integer_cst 0x7ffff6539180 0> max <integer_cst 0x7ffff65391b0 1> pointer_to_this <pointer_type 0x7ffff670cb28>> used unsigned HI t.f90:3:18 size <integer_cst 0x7ffff6517dc8 16> unit-size <integer_cst 0x7ffff6517de0 2> align:16 warn_if_not_align:0 context <function_decl 0x7ffff670e500 s>> the intent of the verifier is to avoid the need to deal with referencing padding in registers. I'm not sure we absolutely have to uphold that but a workaround would be to V_C_E the non-mode-precision operand to a mode-precision operand and perform the BIT_FIELD_REF on that instead. Note we don't seem to have any issue with non-integral typed non-mode-precision operands here which is a bit inconsistent. That was changed with the fix for PR88739.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-14 6:41 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-09-13 19:32 [Bug fortran/106934] New: [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed gscfq@t-online.de 2022-09-13 19:44 ` [Bug fortran/106934] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-09-13 20:15 ` [Bug fortran/106934] [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed since r9-5682-gef310a95a934d0f3 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-09-14 6:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-09-14 9:57 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106934] " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-09-14 9:58 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106934] [10/11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-10-11 12:07 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-10-17 13:28 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106934] [10/11 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-26 13:05 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106934] [10 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-26 13:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-106934-4-DqIqz2VPww@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).