From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2648 invoked by alias); 2 Aug 2011 09:47:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 2638 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Aug 2011 09:47:33 -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, 02 Aug 2011 09:47:20 +0000 From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/49938] [4.7 regression] ICE in interpret_loop_phi, at tree-scalar-evolution.c:1645 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth 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: 4.7.0 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Keywords Status Last reconfirmed CC Component Target Milestone 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, 02 Aug 2011 09:47:00 -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: 2011-08/txt/msg00146.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49938 Richard Guenther changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |ice-on-valid-code Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2011.08.02 09:46:57 CC| |spop at gcc dot gnu.org Component|c++ |middle-end Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0 Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-08-02 09:46:57 UTC --- Confirmed. #2 0x0000000000ecb2b8 in interpret_loop_phi (loop=0x2aaaad43ca18, loop_phi_node=0x2aaaad44f400) at /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/tree-scalar-evolution.c:1645 1645 gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (new_init) != POLYNOMIAL_CHREC); (gdb) call debug_generic_expr (new_init) {0, +, 2}_1 (gdb) call debug_generic_expr (res) (unsigned int) {(size_type) {0, +, 2}_1, +, D.8756_24}_1 I'm not sure why the assert should be valid here. {0, +, 2}_1 is unsigned int, folding correctly sees that first widening unsigned int to sizetype and then truncating back is useless. What's the problem with dealing with a POLYNOMIAL_CHREC here? Why not simply return chrec_dont_know instead of asserting?