From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 20DCB385773B; Tue, 16 May 2023 08:13:48 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 20DCB385773B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1684224828; bh=B161NPoChcoveRQSzfUvEaP7IxnLFe3QgriqN36o++g=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=UWtp93lg9sAGXSSmnoRaecj/feBh67Mj+fG5KXp6vULr78DJjzwpl4VWtkMk7r1ta 9t9h4fqf6O64rVDNzXX2o5FGJ+GbZrOS0+0GNJayMyEwEZ09CwqCCTwh+OnE4AxlAD dvJVl8mJLgyLVs5aILN3q+iY9vl4Z4hzsIEKklg0= From: "jakub at gcc dot 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 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: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.2 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created 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=3D109868 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 55092 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D55092&action=3Dedit 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.=