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 D08363857B80; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 07:01:28 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D08363857B80
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1666076488;
	bh=QTcfHd1R7YdGH8rUnboPqgD1zcfAwRto4Y6AXrFEsCo=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=FIPLOtai1XIT57vsko7poq6/DfP14fuunFbDuq7rXLhiEsR2lzqWy8yqjcSEcgrh7
	 VyPLEPIGVEAaPdSadlUaSypAv5tbbUfZS6mL0undfORV/hdZzYoB9o3iJWpcuX7pSA
	 hG2vOzbqdwA2aLorafwhr+SEMxqDvlDemnfPDBYA=
From: "aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/107299] [13 regression] ICE in stage 1 after 
 r13-3307-g8efc38347a7444
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 07:01:28 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: everconfirmed cc bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on
Message-ID: <bug-107299-4-B6J10VMD2F@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107299-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107299-4@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=3D107299

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
                 CC|                            |amacleod at redhat dot com
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2022-10-18

--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We are failing while trying to fold:

c_92 =3D __builtin_copysignf128 (0.0, c_80(D));

The problem is that c_92 is TFtype but 0.0 is _Float128.  TFtype has a
precision of 127 whereas _Float128 has a precision of 128.  This causes the
assert in fold_using_range::fold_stmt to fail because range_compatible_p is
false.

Are both operands of copysign allowed to have different types / precisions?=