From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-341133-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 19229 invoked by alias); 17 Dec 2010 16:12:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 19220 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Dec 2010 16:12:35 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 16:12:31 +0000
From: "jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/46987] [4.6 Regression] g++.dg/torture/covariant-1.C ICE: double free or corruption with -fno-inline
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.6.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-46987-4-wordczUg6y@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-46987-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-46987-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 16:12:00 -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
X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg02116.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46987

--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-12-17 16:12:25 UTC ---
I've nailed this down to

  gimple_call_set_arg (call_stmt, 0, tmp);

in gimple_adjust_this_by_delta.  When I comment it out, the corruption
goes away (though the produced code is of course wrong).  Otherwise it
all blows up later in tree-ssa-ccp.  (The new parameter is a result of
a new PTR_PLUS with a thunk delta which is a constant).

But I don't see anything wrong with gimple_adjust_this_by_delta, at
least not at the moment...