From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-368172-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 17320 invoked by alias); 19 Sep 2011 18:21:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 17304 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Sep 2011 18:21:57 -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, 19 Sep 2011 18:21:43 +0000
From: "jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/50326] [4.7 regression] ICE in set_lattice_value, at tree-ssa-ccp.c:456
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 19:46:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build
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: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-50326-4-D0gQnmUjix@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-50326-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-50326-4@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: 2011-09/txt/msg01349.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50326

--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-09-19 18:21:25 UTC ---
The compilation before and after the patch seems to diverge at expand
time and only in one instruction when processing this particular
gimple statement:

  MEM[(struct prop_value_d *)&D.39146].lattice_val = val$lattice_val_443;

When val$lattice_val is an enum type, it is expanded to:

(insn 4927 4926 4928 593 (set (mem/s/c:SI (reg/f:DI 2698) [10 MEM[(struct
prop_value_d *)&D.39146].lattice_val+0 S4 A128])
        (reg:SI 433 [ val$lattice_val ]))
/abuild/mjambor/trunk/src/gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c:1685 -1
     (nil))

whereas when it is <unnamed-unsigned:32>, it is expanded to:

(insn 4927 4926 4928 593 (set (mem/s/c:SI (reg/f:DI 2698) [4 MEM[(struct
prop_value_d *)&D.39146].lattice_val+0 S4 A128])
        (reg:SI 433 [ val$lattice_val ]))
/abuild/mjambor/trunk/src/gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c:1685 -1
     (nil))

The difference is 4 instead of 10.  Now I am entering an entirely
unchartered territory for me on quite a few levels so don't hold your
breath for any progress.  I will keep looking into this, though.