From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-366054-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 18148 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2011 10:01:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 18133 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Aug 2011 10:01:04 -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; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:00:38 +0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/50133] [4.7 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in vect_finish_stmt_generation (gimple.h:4821) with -ftree-vectorize -fno-tree-loop-im
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:28:00 -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-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-50133-4-VhcHiE2niX@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-50133-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-50133-4@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
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: 2011-08/txt/msg01828.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50133

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-08-22 09:59:51 UTC ---
Or, alternatively can't we use:
  gimple_set_location (vec_stmt, gimple_location (stmt));
instead (and remove all the si handling stuff)?
It seems before PR37482 we were using the scalar stmt's location instead of the
gsi, which makes much more sense to me.  Ira, any reason why you've changed it?
I mean the asserts obviously with the patch had to be removed, but I wonder
about the gimple_set_location line...