From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id D36FB3853572; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:25:16 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D36FB3853572 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1681716316; bh=3NvIWhmsERo9T+DGlmyYoeiK42h8Sxwi/BDqLsz7Ulc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Ghkw4s7JYzdfA4+QlfDr+WgCdpPCO+/r4RrNsNqEtCEuL9uif+xOVBFq2OgLr0ay8 1fOLwl51H5OGsU/Fw4ad2Mva2aDt7VCI6vIAPLoDRBEped+epIY/nIgsFpNY8C7UaU YxUzbKpujhAGm5hoVqh185r5rh1sY67Of6MVCVTw= From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/109531] Checking ICE with hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:25:16 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-checking, ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 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: cc 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=3D109531 Martin Li=C5=A1ka changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Martin Li=C5=A1ka --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5) > >'g++-13 -O2 -Wall -c ArithmeticSubtermGeneralization.ii' is enough to re= produce. >=20 > Interesting because it was not for me, but I noticed that removing all of > the lines that begin with "#" is able to reproduce without any options on= ly. > Anyways my current reproducing script is: > ``` > if !(~/upstream-gcc/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/13.0.1/cc1plus > -std=3Dc++14 -fno-checking -quiet -Wfatal-errors $1 >& file1.out); then > exit 1 > fi > if !(~/upstream-gcc/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/13.0.1/cc1plus > -std=3Dc++14 -quiet -Wfatal-errors $1 >& file.out); then > if grep "hashtab_chk_error" file.out >&/dev/null; then > exit 0 > fi > exit 1 > fi > if !(~/upstream-gcc/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/13.0.1/cc1plus > -std=3Dc++14 -march=3Dznver3 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -quiet > -Wfatal-errors $1 >& file1.out); then > if grep "hashtab_chk_error" file1.out >&/dev/null; then > exit 0 > fi > exit 1 > fi > ``` >=20 > Yes it is more complex than a standard one would be because I want to red= uce > it to be a valid testcase (the first run of cc1plus) and then I noticed > sometimes it reproduces with slightly different options so test with thos= e. > Hopefully the -fno-checking is enough to force not checking hashtable > checking ... You can achieve result with the following command with C-Vise: cvise -c 'timeout 5 g++ -std=3Dc++14 -march=3Dznver3 -O2 -fno-strict-alias= ing -Wall ArithmeticSubtermGeneralization.ii -w -Wfatal-errors 2>&1 | grep hashtab_chk_error && timeout 5 g++-13 ArithmeticSubtermGeneralization.ii -c -Wfatal-errors -w' ArithmeticSubtermGeneralization.ii I'm currently reducing that right now..=