[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.5/4.6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.5/4.6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.5.2                       |4.5.3

--- Comment #52 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-12-16 13:03:31 UTC ---
GCC 4.5.2 is being released, adjusting target milestone.

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.5.3                       |4.5.4

--- Comment #53 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-28 14:51:45 UTC ---
GCC 4.5.3 is being released, adjusting target milestone.

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.5.4                       |4.6.4

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.6.4                       |4.7.4

--- Comment #54 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-04-12 15:17:06 UTC ---
GCC 4.6.4 has been released and the branch has been closed.

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.7/4.8/4.9/4.10 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.7.4                       |4.8.4

--- Comment #55 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The 4.7 branch is being closed, moving target milestone to 4.8.4.

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.8.4                       |4.8.5

--- Comment #56 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 4.8.4 has been released.

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |burnus at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #57 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
See also PR64950

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.8/4.9/5/6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rth at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |vries at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #58 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #57)
> See also PR64950

[ Adding alpha maintainer to cc. ]

Given the fix of PR64950, we should be able to remove the workaround committed
for this PR.

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.8/4.9/5/6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

--- Comment #59 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to vries from comment #58)

> Given the fix of PR64950, we should be able to remove the workaround
> committed for this PR.

I have started bootstrap/regtest with the following revert:

--cut here--
Index: config/alpha/alpha.c
===================================================================
--- config/alpha/alpha.c (revision 222228)
+++ config/alpha/alpha.c (working copy)
@@ -5957,10 +5957,6 @@ alpha_build_builtin_va_list (void)
                    integer_type_node);
   DECL_FIELD_CONTEXT (ofs) = record;
   DECL_CHAIN (ofs) = space;
-  /* ??? This is a hack, __offset is marked volatile to prevent
-     DCE that confuses stdarg optimization and results in
-     gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-1.c failure.  See PR 41089.  */
-  TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (ofs) = 1;

   base = build_decl (BUILTINS_LOCATION,
                     FIELD_DECL, get_identifier ("__base"),
--cut here--
>From gcc-bugs-return-484045-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Apr 20 10:21:11 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484045-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91092 invoked by alias); 20 Apr 2015 10:21:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91015 invoked by uid 48); 20 Apr 2015 10:21:05 -0000
From: "paolo.carlini at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/65801] [5/6 Regression] Allow -Wno-narrowing to silence stricter C++11 narrowing rules
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 10:21:00 -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: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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-65801-4-CgUgCWvl4K@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65801-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65801-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg01597.txt.bz2
Content-length: 377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide801

--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
Well, at the time I think we agreed that we wanted to be strict at least about
enums... Otherwise, yes, we can do that plus setting ok = true in that case
too, thus collapsing the last two ifs (+ reverting the docs change and
adjusting the testsuite).

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.8/4.9/5/6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|SUSPENDED                   |ASSIGNED
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |ubizjak at gmail dot com

--- Comment #60 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #59)
> (In reply to vries from comment #58)
> 
> > Given the fix of PR64950, we should be able to remove the workaround
> > committed for this PR.
> 
> I have started bootstrap/regtest with the following revert:

Testresults at [1] show that it is now safe to revert the workaround.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-04/msg02422.html
>From gcc-bugs-return-484130-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Apr 21 06:30:15 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484130-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 65334 invoked by alias); 21 Apr 2015 06:30:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 65087 invoked by uid 55); 21 Apr 2015 06:30:11 -0000
From: "uros at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.8/4.9/5/6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 06:30:00 -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: 4.5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: uros at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P5
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-41089-4-A7Rt8M0K9t@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-41089-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-41089-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg01682.txt.bz2
Content-length: 508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idA089

--- Comment #61 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Apr 21 06:29:37 2015
New Revision: 222257

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev"2257&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
    PR tree-optimization/64950
    Revert:
    2010-08-02  Uros Bizjak  <ubizjak@gmail.com>

    PR target/41089
    * config/alpha/alpha.c (alpha_build_builtin_va_list): Mark __offset
    as volatile.


Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/config/alpha/alpha.c

[Bug target/41089] [4.8/4.9/5/6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089

Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
          Component|tree-optimization           |target
         Depends on|                            |64950
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
   Target Milestone|4.8.5                       |6.0

--- Comment #62 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
Fixed for gcc 6, no plan to backport.
>From gcc-bugs-return-484132-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Apr 21 07:41:41 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484132-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 55125 invoked by alias); 21 Apr 2015 07:41:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 55063 invoked by uid 48); 21 Apr 2015 07:41:37 -0000
From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/65823] New: [6 Regression] ICE in gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-2.c -O0/-O1 for arm
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 07:41:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: vries at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
Message-ID: <bug-65823-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg01684.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1683

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide823

            Bug ID: 65823
           Summary: [6 Regression] ICE in gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-2.c
                    -O0/-O1 for arm
           Product: gcc
           Version: 5.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: tree-optimization
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: vries at gcc dot gnu.org

Comparing:
- https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-04/msg02096.html (r222178) and
- https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-04/msg02042.html (r222164)
shows two new stdarg-2.c failures for arm:
...
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-2.c   -O0  (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-2.c   -O0  (test for excess errors)
...

According to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01114.html :
...
/projects/.../src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-2.c:
In function 'f3':
/projects/.../src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-2.c:61:1:
error: incorrect sharing of tree nodes
aps[4]
# .MEM_5 = VDEF <.MEM_11>
aps[4] = aps[4];
/projects/.../src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-2.c:61:1:
internal compiler error: verify_gimple failed
0xae4893 verify_gimple_in_cfg(function*, bool)
    /projects/.../src/gcc/gcc/tree-cfg.c:5136
0x9e3f2f execute_function_todo
    /projects/.../src/gcc/gcc/passes.c:1946
0x9e48d3 execute_todo
    /projects/.../src/gcc/gcc/passes.c:2003
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
...

[Bug target/41089] [4.8/4.9/5/6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[ro at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089
Bug 41089 depends on bug 64950, which changed state.

Bug 64950 Summary: postpone expanding va_arg till pass_stdarg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64950

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|FIXED                       |---

[Bug target/41089] [4.8/4.9/5/6 Regression] stdarg pass produces wrong code

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089
Bug 41089 depends on bug 64950, which changed state.

Bug 64950 Summary: postpone expanding va_arg till pass_stdarg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64950

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED