From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12363 invoked by alias); 29 Mar 2011 13:13:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 12349 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Mar 2011 13:13:45 -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; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:13:41 +0000 From: "jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/48330] [4.7 Regression] ICE: in optimize_inline_calls, at tree-inline.c:4201 with -fmudflap -fno-early-inlining 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: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Status Last reconfirmed CC Ever Confirmed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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, 29 Mar 2011 13:27:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg02992.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48330 Martin Jambor changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2011.03.29 13:13:29 CC| |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor 2011-03-29 13:13:29 UTC --- The following (untested) patch fixes the issue. It seems OK to me as the lowering passes probably should know that the current function is "analyzed" but I guess we should ask Honza whether it is really correct: Index: src/gcc/cgraphunit.c =================================================================== --- src.orig/gcc/cgraphunit.c +++ src/gcc/cgraphunit.c @@ -796,8 +796,8 @@ cgraph_analyze_function (struct cgraph_n gimplify_function_tree (decl); dump_function (TDI_generic, decl); - cgraph_lower_function (node); node->analyzed = true; + cgraph_lower_function (node); pop_cfun (); current_function_decl = save;