public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/109868] [13/14 regression] ICE: segmentation fault or ICE in min_value with zero sized bitfield Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 08:13:47 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-109868-4-Yd3hfYYHgC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-109868-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109868 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Created attachment 55092 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55092&action=edit gcc14-pr109868.patch I think the FE shouldn't initialize those, rather than gimplifier fixing it up later. In fact, I think we shouldn't initialize any unnamed bitfields, but am not changing that, because zero initialization is supposed to clear all padding bytes and !CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING certainly doesn't guarantee that in the middle-end, I think we need some other CONSTRUCTOR flag and middle-end assurance that the padding bits are then cleared.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-16 8:13 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-05-15 22:37 [Bug c++/109868] New: [13/14 regression] ICE: segmentation fault when building small C++ program sjames at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 22:40 ` [Bug c++/109868] " sjames at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 22:40 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 22:43 ` [Bug tree-optimization/109868] [13/14 regression] ICE: segmentation fault or ICE in min_value with zero sized bitfield pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 22:45 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 22:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 22:53 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 22:55 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 23:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 23:02 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-15 23:06 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-16 0:13 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-16 0:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-16 4:25 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-16 8:13 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-05-16 15:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 6:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 8:16 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 19:27 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 19:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 19:32 ` cvs-commit 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-109868-4-Yd3hfYYHgC@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).