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 8A6513858C98; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:26:00 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 8A6513858C98
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1710969960;
	bh=SLzgztpJ1k2hbq+h9Sj98OaeIEqu9iMudAnXTkIRFMA=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=RdaNqKX51Nzl+i2vbW+kEQwnHibjBYllQkSOiakaKewyGqDC4QbO66ObkPUZhQBUf
	 mQUlmwfX8WQmw/hLGuVjBgJvskFnVLjmOgcWbfYt3fEZnJ0xCGhzuuLMTt8tuiygUY
	 gi1pLxB6TfxRhfkKW3VJN416gSrN9HkFz0MnAwq4=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/114409] ICE after adding novector pragmas (internal
 compiler error: in tsubst_expr, at cp/pt.cc:21794)
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:26:00 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia 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: 
Message-ID: <bug-114409-4-sKnryPSfyU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114409-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114409-4@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=3D114409

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> > If you can think of a workaround, please let me know, as unfortunately =
this
> > loop is the one where the assert in the other bug gets hit :(
>=20
> An easy workaround is to add:
> asm("":::"memory");
>=20
> Right after the opening `{`.
> But that might be too much of a hammer in some cases ...

Even a simple `__builtin_printf("");` added to the loop might avoid the
vectorization to figure out where the wrong code happens.=