[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.9.0

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[izamyatin at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |izamyatin at gmail dot com

--- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin at gmail dot com> ---
Dup of PR57337?

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
still fails with r199397

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Bug 57393 depends on bug 57337, which changed state.

Bug 57337 Summary: [4.9 Regression] 416.gamess ICE on x86 after r199048
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57337

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2013-05-29
                 CC|                            |eraman at google dot com
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Re-confirmed to be reassoc.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
Simplified testcase that fails with 'gfortran -c -g -O2 -ffast-math bug.f90'

> cat bug.f90
  SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(npoints,e,g,sx)
    IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
    INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
    REAL(kind=dp) :: e(npoints)
    DO ii=1,npoints
       t804 = 0.1955555555e2_dp * t7 * t766 + &
              0.6000000000e1_dp * t405 * t2873 * t237
       t3026 = 0.1620000000e3_dp * t1143 * t474 * t2169 + &
               0.1080000000e3_dp * t1143 * t3030 * t237 - &
               0.6000000000e1_dp * t478 * t27 * t379 * t14 - &
               0.2400000000e2_dp * t478 * t123 * t2843 - &
               0.1200000000e2_dp * t473 * t1157 * t2368
       t3070 = t3026 + t3069
       t3093 = (3 * t496 * t865 * t65) + &
               (t187 * t2285 * t65) + (t3070 * t65) - &
               0.3333333336e0_dp * t1137 * t1134
       t3268 = 0.1555555556e1_dp * t2937 * t446 * t2843 + &
                  (t3093 + t3141 + t3181 + t3232) *  &
               0.3125000000e0_dp * t3262 * t45 * t166 * t3264
       t3288 = -0.1000000001e1_dp * t165 * t2636 * t237 - &
                (t2724 + t2783 + t2935 + t3268) - &
                0.8333333340e-1_dp * t906 * t384 * t2160
       t3291 = -0.1000000001e1_dp * t2147 * t84 * t754 - &
                t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
       IF( g>= 3 .OR. g== -3 ) THEN
         e(ii) = e(ii) +  t3291 * sx
       END IF
    END DO
  END SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #7 from Dmitry Gorbachev <d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com> ---
For convenience, I put here a testcase from bug 57400. Joost VandeVondele:
"this second testcase is almost certainly a dup of PR57393. It passes with
-fno-tree-reassoc. The testcase is conveniently smaller."

======================== 8< ========================
extern void bar(double);

struct S {
  int n;
};

void foo(struct S s, double a, int i, int j, int k)
{
  struct S t;
  bar(s.n * a * i * j);
  t.n = s.n * a * i * k;
}
======================== >8 ========================

$ gcc -S -g -O -ffast-math bug.c
bug.c: In function 'foo':
bug.c:7:6: error: definition in block 2 follows the use
 void foo(struct S s, double a, int i, int j, int k)
      ^
for SSA_NAME: _4 in statement:
# DEBUG D#3 => _4 * _6
bug.c:7:6: internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed
0x888c299 verify_ssa(bool)
    ../../gcc-4.9/gcc/tree-ssa.c:1046
0x85dc5ca execute_function_todo
    ../../gcc-4.9/gcc/passes.c:1970
0x85db901 do_per_function
    ../../gcc-4.9/gcc/passes.c:1707
0x85dc6df execute_todo
    ../../gcc-4.9/gcc/passes.c:2002
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.

GCC 4.9.0 20130630 (experimental).

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[dcb314 at hotmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #8 from David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> ---
Still fails on 20130710. 

Another test case that generates the same message is available on request.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |su at cs dot ucdavis.edu

--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 57923 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 58131 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #11 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 58018 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #12 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Started with r199048.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #13 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #12)
> Started with r199048.

yes, as was pointed out in PR57370

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57370#c2

which is presumably a dup (but hanging instead of ICEing).

Given the number of duplicates, it would be great to see this fixed sooner than
later, but so far there has been no reply by the author of r199048.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[dcb314 at hotmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #14 from David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> ---
>Given the number of duplicates, it would be great to see this fixed sooner than >later, but so far there has been no reply by the author of r199048.

They have had almost 13 weeks to think about it. Ok, it's holiday season,
but AFAIK that's quite some time really.

Richard Biener is usually pretty sharp at these kind of problems.

Richard, do you have any spare time to offer your expertise, or should I
avoid bothering you at this time ?

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #15 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The fix am about to test (optimize_range_tests can change the ranks...)

--- gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c.mp    2013-08-20 13:40:45.478290165 +0200
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c    2013-08-20 13:41:00.428348680 +0200
@@ -4237,6 +4237,9 @@ reassociate_bb (basic_block bb)
           if (TREE_CODE (lhs) == SSA_NAME && has_zero_uses (lhs))
         continue;

+          if (rhs_code == BIT_IOR_EXPR || rhs_code == BIT_AND_EXPR)
+        optimize_range_tests (rhs_code, &ops);
+
           gimple_set_visited (stmt, true);
           linearize_expr_tree (&ops, stmt, true, true);
           ops.qsort (sort_by_operand_rank);
@@ -4248,9 +4251,6 @@ reassociate_bb (basic_block bb)
           optimize_ops_list (rhs_code, &ops);
         }

-          if (rhs_code == BIT_IOR_EXPR || rhs_code == BIT_AND_EXPR)
-        optimize_range_tests (rhs_code, &ops);
-
           if (first_pass_instance
           && rhs_code == MULT_EXPR
           && flag_unsafe_math_optimizations)

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
That doesn't look right to me, optimize_range_test I'd expect to depend on the
linearization etc.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #17 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yeah, it "fixed" a few testcases for me, but it's wrong. :(

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[eraman at google dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #18 from Easwaran Raman <eraman at google dot com> ---
Could you confirm if the patch in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01584.html fix this? I am waiting
for someone to review that patch.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                URL|                            |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
                   |                            |atches/2013-07/msg01584.htm
                   |                            |l

--- Comment #19 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
(In reply to Easwaran Raman from comment #18)
> Could you confirm if the patch in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01584.html fix this? I am
> waiting for someone to review that patch.

Thanks! I have added the patch URL to bugzilla.

I've tested your patch, and it fixes the Fortran testcase in comment #6 . It
does not fix the c testcase in comment #7.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #20 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes, the patch maybe fixes the debuginfo issue, but there's something else that
is wrong.  E.g., on the testcase from PR58018, we have in reassociate_bb
*after*
(and that is important) optimize_range_tests this:

<bb 7>:
[...]
e.1_16 = _14 & e.0_15;
_17 = f_12 >= 0;
_18 = (int) _17;
e.1_19 = e.1_16 & _18;
_20 = f_12 > 0;
_23 = f_12 > 0;
_24 = (int) _23;
_21 = (int) _20;
e.1_22 = e.1_19 & _21;
[...]

Now, in reassociate_bb, we go over the stmts, from the last stmt to the first
stmt in the bb.  For the appropriate stmts, we call rewrite_expr_tree to
rewrite the linearized statements according to the operand_entry_t ops vector,
in this case we call it on
  e.1_22 = e.1_19 & _21;
and the vector ops contains
  Op 0 -> rank: 589826, tree: _14
  Op 1 -> rank: 3, tree: _24
  Op 2 -> rank: 1, tree: e.0_15

In rewrite_expr_tree, we recursively call this function on e.1_19, whose
SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT is
  e.1_19 = e.1_16 & _18;
This stmt is then transformed into
  e.1_19 = _24 & e.0_15;

But, at the point where e.1_19 is defined, the _24 isn't defined yet!

So, it seems, ensure_ops_are_available should handle a situation like this. 
However, it doesn't: perhaps the issue is that find_insert_point won't find the
right insert point (the stmt is e.1_19 = e.1_16 & _18;, the dep_stmt is _24 =
(int) _23;), in there we have:

  if (gimple_uid (insert_stmt) == gimple_uid (dep_stmt)
      && gimple_bb (insert_stmt) == gimple_bb (dep_stmt)
      && insert_stmt != dep_stmt)
    insert_stmt = appears_later_in_bb (insert_stmt, dep_stmt);
  else if (not_dominated_by (insert_stmt, dep_stmt))
    insert_stmt = dep_stmt;
  return insert_stmt;

Neither of these condition holds; gimple_uid of the dep_stmt is 0 and of
insert_stmt it is 16.  Thus, find_insert_point returns e.1_19 = e.1_16 & _18;. 
That's wrong, I suppose.
Maybe the issue is that if the two stms are in the same bb, we just look at
their UIDs and based on that we find out the dependency, but the new stms
coming  from optimize_range_tests don't have gimple UIDs set, thus this can't
work.
Likely I'm wrong, would appreciate if someone could shed some light on this.

Looking into it more...

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[eraman at google dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #21 from Easwaran Raman <eraman at google dot com> ---
Created attachment 30690
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30690&action=edit
Proposed patch

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[eraman at google dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #22 from Easwaran Raman <eraman at google dot com> ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #20)
> Yes, the patch maybe fixes the debuginfo issue, but there's something else
> that is wrong.  E.g., on the testcase from PR58018, we have in
> reassociate_bb *after*
> (and that is important) optimize_range_tests this:
> 
> <bb 7>:
> [...]
> e.1_16 = _14 & e.0_15;
> _17 = f_12 >= 0;
> _18 = (int) _17;
> e.1_19 = e.1_16 & _18;
> _20 = f_12 > 0;
> _23 = f_12 > 0;
> _24 = (int) _23;
> _21 = (int) _20;
> e.1_22 = e.1_19 & _21;
> [...]
> 
> Now, in reassociate_bb, we go over the stmts, from the last stmt to the
> first stmt in the bb.  For the appropriate stmts, we call rewrite_expr_tree
> to rewrite the linearized statements according to the operand_entry_t ops
> vector, in this case we call it on
>   e.1_22 = e.1_19 & _21;
> and the vector ops contains
>   Op 0 -> rank: 589826, tree: _14
>   Op 1 -> rank: 3, tree: _24
>   Op 2 -> rank: 1, tree: e.0_15
> 
> In rewrite_expr_tree, we recursively call this function on e.1_19, whose
> SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT is
>   e.1_19 = e.1_16 & _18;
> This stmt is then transformed into
>   e.1_19 = _24 & e.0_15;
> 
> But, at the point where e.1_19 is defined, the _24 isn't defined yet!
> 
> So, it seems, ensure_ops_are_available should handle a situation like this. 
> However, it doesn't: perhaps the issue is that find_insert_point won't find
> the right insert point (the stmt is e.1_19 = e.1_16 & _18;, the dep_stmt is
> _24 = (int) _23;), in there we have:
> 
>   if (gimple_uid (insert_stmt) == gimple_uid (dep_stmt)
>       && gimple_bb (insert_stmt) == gimple_bb (dep_stmt)
>       && insert_stmt != dep_stmt)
>     insert_stmt = appears_later_in_bb (insert_stmt, dep_stmt);
>   else if (not_dominated_by (insert_stmt, dep_stmt))
>     insert_stmt = dep_stmt;
>   return insert_stmt;
> 
> Neither of these condition holds; gimple_uid of the dep_stmt is 0 and of
> insert_stmt it is 16.  Thus, find_insert_point returns e.1_19 = e.1_16 &
> _18;.  That's wrong, I suppose.
> Maybe the issue is that if the two stms are in the same bb, we just look at
> their UIDs and based on that we find out the dependency, but the new stms
> coming  from optimize_range_tests don't have gimple UIDs set, thus this
> can't work.
> Likely I'm wrong, would appreciate if someone could shed some light on this.
> 
> Looking into it more...

The problem with this test case is that there is a statement with uid 0 that is
being compared. The assumption was every stmt will have a UID in a
monotonically non-decreasing order. This is broken here because
force_gimple_operand_gsi generates new stmts that don't have a UID. The
proposed patch generates UIDs for these newly generated statements but I think
this is a bit ugly and fragile now.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #24 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
Also the other 'dup' PRs still fail (gcc -O3) . Collecting testcases here:

> cat  PR58018.c

int a, b, c, d, e;

void bar (int p)
{
  int f = b;
  e &= p <= (f ^= 0);
}

void foo ()
{
  for (; d; d++)
    {
      bar (a && c);
      bar (0);
      bar (1);
    }
}


> cat PR58131.c

short a;
int b, c;
int d[1][4][2];

void foo ()
{
  int *e;
  for (b = 1;; b--)
    {
      if (*e)
    break;
      for (c = 2; c >= 0; c--)
        {
      *e |= d[0][3][b] != a;
      int *f = &d[0][3][b];
      *f = 0;
        }
    }
}

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #25 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
*** Bug 58248 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 57718 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[eraman at google dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #27 from Easwaran Raman <eraman at google dot com> ---
These two test cases pass for me (compiles with -O3) with the attached patch
(http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30690). 
gcc --version returns:

gcc (GCC) 4.9.0 20130821 (experimental)

At what revision are you still getting the ICEs? The patch attached to this bug
subsumes the one posted in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01584.html .

(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #24)
> Also the other 'dup' PRs still fail (gcc -O3) . Collecting testcases here:
> 
> > cat  PR58018.c
> 
> int a, b, c, d, e;
> 
> void bar (int p)
> {
>   int f = b;
>   e &= p <= (f ^= 0);
> }
> 
> void foo ()
> {
>   for (; d; d++)
>     {
>       bar (a && c);
>       bar (0);
>       bar (1);
>     }
> }
> 
> 
> > cat PR58131.c
> 
> short a;
> int b, c;
> int d[1][4][2];
> 
> void foo ()
> {
>   int *e;
>   for (b = 1;; b--)
>     {
>       if (*e)
> 	break;
>       for (c = 2; c >= 0; c--)
>         {
> 	  *e |= d[0][3][b] != a;
> 	  int *f = &d[0][3][b];
> 	  *f = 0;
>         }
>     }
> }
>From gcc-bugs-return-428564-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Aug 28 18:01:59 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-428564-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15376 invoked by alias); 28 Aug 2013 18:01:59 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15311 invoked by uid 48); 28 Aug 2013 18:01:56 -0000
From: "Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 18:01:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-57393-4-qzCNzrnskf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57393-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57393-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg01488.txt.bz2
Content-length: 513

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idW393

--- Comment #28 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
(In reply to Easwaran Raman from comment #27)
> These two test cases pass for me (compiles with -O3) with the attached patch
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id0690).
> gcc --version returns:

OK, with only the patch mentioned above applied all testcases now pass. I think
this patch should be posted to gcc-patches for review, if you haven't done yet.
Thanks!

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #29 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #28)
> OK, with only the patch mentioned above applied all testcases now pass. I
> think this patch should be posted to gcc-patches for review, if you haven't
> done yet. Thanks!

Unfortunately, more testing with this patch applied now leads to this:

> gfortran -g -O2 -c  bug.f90
bug.f90: In function ‘mp_alltoall_z11v’:
bug.f90:1:0: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
   SUBROUTINE mp_alltoall_z11v ( sb, scount, sdispl, rb, rcount, rdispl, group
)
 ^
0x9d222f crash_signal
    ../../gcc/gcc/toplev.c:335
0xb11ac7 assign_uids_for_stmts_before
    ../../gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c:1968
0xb128bb negate_value
    ../../gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c:3410
0xb1b123 break_up_subtract
    ../../gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c:3460
0xb1b123 break_up_subtract_bb
    ../../gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c:3801

> cat bug.f90
  SUBROUTINE mp_alltoall_z11v ( sb, scount, sdispl, rb, rcount, rdispl, group )
    COMPLEX(kind=8), DIMENSION(:), INTENT(IN)        :: sb
    INTEGER, DIMENSION(:), INTENT(IN)        :: scount, sdispl, rdispl, rcount
    COMPLEX(kind=8), DIMENSION(:), INTENT(INOUT)     :: rb
    rb(rdispl(1)+1:rdispl(1)+rcount(1))=sb(sdispl(1)+1:sdispl(1)+scount(1))
  END SUBROUTINE mp_alltoall_z11v
>From gcc-bugs-return-428600-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu Aug 29 09:30:26 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-428600-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12475 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2013 09:30:26 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12419 invoked by uid 48); 29 Aug 2013 09:30:22 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/56864] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 0
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 09:30:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status
Message-ID: <bug-56864-4-JNULmfjvKt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-56864-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-56864-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg01524.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2411

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idV864

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The difference is:

-/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: Setting misalignment to -1.
-/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: Alignment of access forced using peeling.
-/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: Peeling for alignment will be applied.
-/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: Vectorizing an unaligned access.
+/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: vect_model_store_cost: unsupported access.
+/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: vect_get_data_access_cost: inside_cost = 1000, outside_cost = 0.
+/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: vect_model_load_cost: aligned.
+/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: vect_get_data_access_cost: inside_cost = 1001, outside_cost = 0.
+/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: Alignment of access forced using versioning.
+/home/andreas/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-76b.c:21:
note: Versioning for alignment will be applied.

so we decide to version for alignment instead of peeling for alignment
and decide that that's profitable (the load is aligned already, the
store is, at runtime at least).

I've seen in the past that the outcome of the peeling vs. versioning
decision depends on the order of DRs ... that is, the algorithm is
not stable and clearly doesn't find an optimal solution.  One would need to
single-step through vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment for both revisions
to eventually figure out the underlying issue.

I would be willing to do that with a cross if somebody can provide
preprocessed source and configure args.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[eraman at google dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Easwaran Raman <eraman at google dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #30690|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #30 from Easwaran Raman <eraman at google dot com> ---
Created attachment 30727
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30727&action=edit
New patch

This fixes the ICE. Bootstraps ok with this patch, but haven't run the tests.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #31 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
(In reply to Easwaran Raman from comment #30)
> Created attachment 30727 [details]
> New patch

fixes all previously observed issues and further light testing.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #32 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 58247 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dhazeghi at yahoo dot com

--- Comment #33 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 57592 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[regehr at cs dot utah.edu]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 5686 bytes --]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

John Regehr <regehr at cs dot utah.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |regehr at cs dot utah.edu

--- Comment #34 from John Regehr <regehr at cs dot utah.edu> ---
Looks like another occurrence of the same issue?

regehr@john-home ~/z/reduce/r114 $ gcc -c -O3 small.c
small.c: In function ‘x4’:
small.c:3:5: error: definition in block 3 follows the use
 int x4() {
     ^
for SSA_NAME: _30 in statement:
x1.2_15 = _30 & pretmp_25;
small.c:3:5: internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed
0xaa1e9d verify_ssa(bool)
    /home/regehr/z/compiler-source/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa.c:1046
0x87ea51 execute_function_todo
    /home/regehr/z/compiler-source/gcc/gcc/passes.c:1834
0x87f197 execute_todo
    /home/regehr/z/compiler-source/gcc/gcc/passes.c:1866
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
regehr@john-home ~/z/reduce/r114 $ 
regehr@john-home ~/z/reduce/r114 $ cat small.c
int x0, x1, x2;
void x3();
int x4() {
  for (;;) {
    x3();
    int x5 = x0 = 0;
    for (; x0 < 7; ++x0) {
      x5--;
      x1 &= x2 <= x5;
    }
  }
}
regehr@john-home ~/z/reduce/r114 $ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/regehr/z/compiler-install/gcc-r202470-install/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /home/regehr/z/compiler-source/gcc/configure
--prefix=/home/regehr/z/compiler-install/gcc-r202470-install
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20130910 (experimental) (GCC)
>From gcc-bugs-return-429509-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Sep 10 17:38:26 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-429509-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20969 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2013 17:38:26 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20938 invoked by uid 48); 10 Sep 2013 17:38:23 -0000
From: "rcopley at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/54412] Request for 32-byte stack alignment with -mavx on Windows
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 17:38:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.7.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rcopley at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-54412-4-Rp1alLV9zJ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-54412-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-54412-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-09/txt/msg00749.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1955

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idT412

--- Comment #3 from R Copley <rcopley at gmail dot com> ---
Created attachment 30794
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id0794&actioníit
Assembly-language code compiled from attachment 1

Compiled with GCC 4.7.2 from the MinGW-w64 toolchain.
Compile command: "gcc -O0 -m64 -mavx -S bug1.c -o bug1.s".
gcc -v output:

Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=c:/mingw64/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/4.7.2/lto-wrapper.exe
Target: x86_64-w64-mingw32
Configured with: /home/ruben/mingw-w64/src/gcc/configure
--host=x86_64-w64-mingw32 --build=x86_64-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-w64-mingw32
--with-sysroot=/home/ruben/mingw-w64/mingw64mingw64/mingw64
--prefix=/home/ruben/mingw-w64/mingw64mingw64/mingw64
--with-gmp=/home/ruben/mingw-w64/prereq/x86_64-w64-mingw32/install
--with-mpfr=/home/ruben/mingw-w64/prereq/x86_64-w64-mingw32/install
--with-mpc=/home/ruben/mingw-w64/prereq/x86_64-w64-mingw32/install
--with-ppl=/home/ruben/mingw-w64/prereq/x86_64-w64-mingw32/install
--with-cloog=/home/ruben/mingw-w64/prereq/x86_64-w64-mingw32/install
--disable-ppl-version-check --disable-cloog-version-check
--enable-cloog-backend=isl --with-host-libstdcxx='-static -lstdc++ -lm'
--enable-shared --enable-static --enable-threads=win32 --enable-plugins
--disable-multilib --enable-languages=c,lto,c++,objc,obj-c++,fortran,java
--enable-libgomp --enable-fully-dynamic-string --enable-libstdcxx-time
--disable-nls --disable-werror --enable-checking=release --with-gnu-as
--with-gnu-ld --disable-win32-registry --disable-rpath --disable-werror
--with-libiconv-prefix=/home/ruben/mingw-w64/prereq/x86_64-w64-mingw32/install
--with-pkgversion=rubenvb-4.7.2-release
--with-bugurl=mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net CC= CFLAGS='-O2
-march=nocona -mtune=core2 -fomit-frame-pointer -momit-leaf-frame-pointer'
LDFLAGSThread model: win32
gcc version 4.7.2 (rubenvb-4.7.2-release)

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #35 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The #c34 testcase seems to fail starting r199048 till current HEAD.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[su at cs dot ucdavis.edu]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #36 from Zhendong Su <su at cs dot ucdavis.edu> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #35)
> The #c34 testcase seems to fail starting r199048 till current HEAD.

Besides John's new testcase from #c34, I've also encountered quite a number of
different testcases causing this same ICE (either at -O2 or -O3, with and
without -g), but the proposed patch by Easwaran from #c30 appears to fix
everything so far (tested with revision 202121).

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ishiura-compiler at ml dot kwansei
                   |                            |.ac.jp

--- Comment #38 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 58494 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |antoine.balestrat at gmail dot com

--- Comment #37 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 57400 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[su at cs dot ucdavis.edu]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #39 from Zhendong Su <su at cs dot ucdavis.edu> ---
*** Bug 58522 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P1
             Status|NEW                         |WAITING

--- Comment #40 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
What's the status on this?

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #41 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #40)
> What's the status on this?

I checked comment #34 and a number of the bugs marked as dup, and they all seem
to pass. I think this can be closed as fixed ?

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #42 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #40)
> What's the status on this?

I'd hope r203979 (and earlier reassoc changes) fixed all this, perhaps we want
to add testcases from this to the testsuite?

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

--- Comment #43 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 27 23:41:56 2013
New Revision: 205466

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205466&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
    PR middle-end/57393
    PR tree-optimization/58018
    PR tree-optimization/58131
    * gcc.dg/torture/pr57393-1.c: New test.
    * gcc.dg/torture/pr57393-2.c: New test.
    * gcc.dg/torture/pr57393-3.c: New test.
    * gcc.dg/torture/pr58018.c: New test.
    * gcc.dg/torture/pr58131.c: New test.
    * gfortran.dg/pr57393-1.f90: New test.
    * gfortran.dg/pr57393-2.f90: New test.

Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr57393-1.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr57393-2.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr57393-3.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr58018.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr58131.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr57393-1.f90
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr57393-2.f90
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #44 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.

[Bug middle-end/57393] [4.9 Regression] error: definition in block 4 follows the use / internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed

[jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393

Jackie Rosen <jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com

--- Comment #45 from Jackie Rosen <jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com> ---
*** Bug 260998 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Seen from the domain http://volichat.com
Page where seen: http://volichat.com/adult-chat-rooms
Marked for reference. Resolved as fixed @bugzilla.