From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26894 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2012 16:39:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 26829 invoked by uid 48); 12 Nov 2012 16:39:29 -0000 From: "glisse at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/55281] [4.8 Regression] ICE in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1217 (with Ofast, ok with O3) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:39:00 -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: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: glisse 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: 4.8.0 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 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 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: 2012-11/txt/msg01036.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55281 --- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse 2012-11-12 16:39:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > I'm just testing that, so I know it doesn't have side-effects. I meant: instead of testing, so the optimization still occurs when there is a side effect. > COND_EXPR handling which I've copied was doing the same thing. Ah, indeed. > The reason for the > fold-const.c change was that while you handle that case in forwprop, it only > triggers if forwprop actually simplifies the condition, but if e.g. copyprop > does that, then nothing will fix it up afterwards till expansion. Understood.