public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/106981] [10/11/12/13 Regression][OpenACC][OpenMP] ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:984 with '#pragma omp/acc atomic capture'
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:08:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-106981-4-P9FlXQAP2q@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-106981-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106981

--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)

> The fix could be either partially backport what C++ FE did in
> --- gcc/c/c-typeck.cc.jj	2022-09-23 09:02:56.525318361 +0200
> +++ gcc/c/c-typeck.cc	2022-09-23 10:33:06.596467788 +0200

> +  if (CONSTANT_CLASS_P (t1) && !comptypes (TREE_TYPE (t1), TREE_TYPE (t2)))
> +    return false;

Maybe. Though I think we still need something like my:

+       if (n > TREE_OPERAND_LENGTH (t2))
+         return false;

(With ">" not ">=" as I accidentally had.)
Given that 
          if (!c_tree_equal (TREE_OPERAND (t1, i), TREE_OPERAND (t2, i)))
does not make sense when exceeding the operand length!

Nonetheless, ...

> Now, wonder what will break if I just strip same type casts and
> for others like in C++ require same type.

sounds like a reasonable approach,.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-09-23  9:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-20 16:40 [Bug c/106981] New: [OpenMP] ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:984 with '#pragma acc " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-20 16:46 ` [Bug c/106981] [OpenACC][OpenMP] ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:984 with '#pragma omp/acc " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-21  7:49 ` [Bug c/106981] [10/11/12/13 Regression][OpenACC][OpenMP] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-21 13:20 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-21 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-21 14:10 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-23  8:59 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-23  9:08 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-09-23  9:15 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-23  9:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-24  7:31 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-18  8:43 ` [Bug c/106981] [10/11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-03  0:23 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-04  8:31 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-11-04 11:01 ` [Bug c/106981] [10 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-03 15:19 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-04  7:19 ` jakub 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-106981-4-P9FlXQAP2q@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: link
Be 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).