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 D6D083858D37; Mon, 22 May 2023 18:13:29 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D6D083858D37
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1684779209;
	bh=Z2v30G1sGPdgXQsyah+RWM7hWy029djiRGc4wy4FA6g=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=g+ceVDmlARg+E0LOsr/RxqnDsNQeM6nnmmkGGNpjib04zWGLrFGNNa1s3iNwG8Aa5
	 nyg/AAg6pzrqzJbYFJzXTtDTIkezPPSOr5FnKPo8mcGzdHcwp3TgxK+pjqooOnQttU
	 iphKf/H8jknqMS2BRDNJX23KZp8c3G8nqnTDsY7U=
From: "aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/109886] UBSAN error: shift exponent 64 is too large for
 64-bit type when compiling gcc.c-torture/compile/pr96796.c
Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 18:13:29 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-109886-4-2HQ1EcUzwg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109886-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109886-4@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=3D109886

--- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #2)
> > If irange::supports_p (TREE_TYPE (arg)) is true, we're talking about an
> > integer/pointer, but if range_cast is being called on a parm_type of
> > RECORD_TYPE, someone's trying to cast a structure to an integer.  Is th=
at
> > the intent here, because that will not work with ranges??
>=20
> That is correct. The generated code has a VIEW_CONVERT_EXR from an integer
> type to a RECORD_TYPE.

Eeeech.  In that case, then what you suggest is reasonable.  Bail if param_=
type
is not supported by the underlying range.  Maybe the IPA experts could opin=
e?=