From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-346529-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 12662 invoked by alias); 8 Feb 2011 12:09:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 12645 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Feb 2011 12:09:30 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,TW_TM
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; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 12:09:24 +0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/47639] [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: statement marked for throw, but doesn't with -fstack-check=generic -fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions
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-checking, ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.5.3
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-47639-4-JsDAFaHxN3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-47639-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-47639-4@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: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 12:12:00 -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: 2011-02/txt/msg00995.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47639

--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-08 12:09:09 UTC ---
Ugh.  We lower

  [LP 1] D.2691_8 = v1_6(D) / v2_7(D);

to

  D.2699_13 = BIT_FIELD_REF <v1_6(D), 32, 0>;
  D.2700_14 = BIT_FIELD_REF <v2_7(D), 32, 0>;
  D.2701_15 = D.2699_13 / D.2700_14;
  D.2702_16 = BIT_FIELD_REF <v1_6(D), 32, 32>;
  D.2703_17 = BIT_FIELD_REF <v2_7(D), 32, 32>;
  D.2704_18 = D.2702_16 / D.2703_17;
  [LP 1] D.2691_8 = {D.2701_15, D.2704_18};

now the most ugly part of that is we construct a big tree with
the CONSTRUCTOR and then feed that to force_gimple_operand ...

What I did in the patch that caused this is to make
{D.2701_15, D.2704_18} not throw - which exposes this bug.

We can hide this issue again by properly clearing EH info on
the CONSTRUCTOR statement, leaving the issue alone that we'd
really need to move EH info to the piecewise computations,
split the block, add new EH edges, etc.

Not worthwhile for stage4 and not a regression.

C++ testcase that fails with -fnon-call-exceptions only:

typedef int __attribute__ ((vector_size (8))) vec;

vec foo (vec v1, vec v2)
{
  try
    {
      return v1 / v2;
    } 
  catch (...)
    {
      throw;
    } 
}