From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 899543858C74; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 07:26:47 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 899543858C74 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1675495607; bh=6DxpszOmKS6ntU+DQCUmop1BYuJ02TM78O4eOdBpWJY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=PysVdYWafHfKvY3c00V6i+sMZmplJymbWzVagOvOFBI8z39Hx2/OrBaF8Zhxgd9oB bsPAlvCUfN7vCd4yvvnBpS9USZK80ZANkjJQTQOtwJbM9w2Bh1UQ5iLd61fP10EKCH CCv5rF3tP1HqeP3USq3r//UQNIBXCHUVasOvuto0= From: "raj.khem at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/108647] [13 Regression] ICE in upper_bound, at value-range.h:950 with -O3 since r13-2974-g67166c9ec35d58ef Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2023 07:26:47 +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: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: raj.khem at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 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=3D108647 --- Comment #22 from Khem Raj --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #20) > How could these changes result in > ../harfbuzz-6.0.0/src/hb-map.hh:295:5: error: no match for =E2=80=98opera= tor|=E2=80=99 > (operand types are =E2=80=98hb_filter_iter_t unsigned int, true>::item_t>, bool (hb_hashmap_t true>::item_t::*)() const, const&, 0>=E2=80=99 and > =E2=80=98hb_reduce_t::hash= () > const:: true>::item_t&)>, unsigned int>=E2=80=99) > errors? I can see that with a cross-compiler, so VRP miscompiling the C++ > FE is not an option. argh my bad, filled in wrong tab. Sorry about this.=