[Bug c++/57416] New: internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[Bug c++/57416] New: internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[FBergemann at web dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

            Bug ID: 57416
           Summary: internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at
                    cfgexpand.c:4575
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.8.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: FBergemann at web dot de

Created attachment 30193
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30193&action=edit
test program main.cpp compiled in eclipse with -std=c++11

while experimenting with
http://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/access-data-items-in-ancestor-stack-fram/240155450 i
got this error here:

**** Build of configuration Debug for project RetainRecall ****

make all 
Building file: ../main.cpp
Invoking: GCC C++ Compiler
/opt/gcc-4.8.0/bin/g++ -O0 -g3 -Wall -c -fmessage-length=0 -std=c++11 -MMD -MP
-MF"main.d" -MT"main.d" -o "main.o" "../main.cpp"
../main.cpp: In constructor ‘constexpr func1(PARENTDATA&) [with PARENTDATA =
Nothing]::Data::Data()’:
../main.cpp:43:9: internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at
cfgexpand.c:4575
  struct Data
         ^
0x655603 gimple_expand_cfg
    ../../gcc/cfgexpand.c:4575
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.
make: *** [main.o] Error 1

**** Build Finished ****
>From gcc-bugs-return-423153-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat May 25 17:39:32 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-423153-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30629 invoked by alias); 25 May 2013 17:39:31 -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 30563 invoked by uid 48); 25 May 2013 17:39:26 -0000
From: "sandra at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/56564] movdqa on possibly-8-byte-aligned struct with -O3
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 17:39:00 -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: 4.7.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ABI, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: sandra at codesourcery dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-56564-4-hPyFzsov94@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-56564-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-56564-4@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: 2013-05/txt/msg01826.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1681

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idV564

Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sandra at codesourcery dot com

--- Comment #11 from Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com> ---
This affects at least PowerPC, too, which implements DATA_ALIGNMENT to add
additional alignment beyond that specified by the ABI.

Isn't TYPE_ALIGN already supposed to return the ABI-mandated alignment for
objects of a given type?  The documentation for DATA_ALIGNMENT already suggests
that its purpose is to add additional alignment for optimization purposes and I
suspect other targets may be using it that way, too.  Perhaps what's needed
here is more careful monitoring of the places where DATA_ALIGNMENT is being
used, rather than splitting it into two macros or adding an argument to control
the two uses.  Or at least, we'd have to clarify how the requirements for the
ABI-conforming use of DATA_ALIGNMENT differ from what TYPE_ALIGN is supposed to
do.

It seems to me that DATA_ALIGNMENT's original purpose was to add additional
alignment on variable definitions, and IIUC the problem now is either that it
is being used in other contexts or that its intended use is not taking into
account common, weak, and/or comdat definitions where the linker may substitute
a less-aligned definition from another compilation unit.

Also, somebody should check whether vect_can_force_dr_alignment_p in
tree-vect-data-refs.c is catching all the cases it needs to for ABI
conformance.

[Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 3125 bytes --]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
                   |                            |com

--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> ---
In the gcc 4.9.0 trunk I see no ICE, only a compiler error. Of-course ICEs need
to be fixed, but I think the example code is notvalid C++11, because the
initialization of the member of the local classes Data odr-use the function
parameter p_parent_data according to 9.8 p1:

"[..] Declarations in a local class shall not odr-use (3.2) a variable with
automatic storage duration from an enclosing scope."
>From gcc-bugs-return-423155-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat May 25 18:18:28 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-423155-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 16985 invoked by alias); 25 May 2013 18:18:27 -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 16952 invoked by uid 48); 25 May 2013 18:18:23 -0000
From: "FBergemann at web dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 18:18:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: FBergemann at web dot de
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-57416-4-ETAYYflXWD@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57416-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57416-4@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: 2013-05/txt/msg01828.txt.bz2
Content-length: 436

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idW416

--- Comment #2 from Frank Bergemann <FBergemann at web dot de> ---
Created attachment 30194
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id0194&actioníit
fixed version of test program - compilation works now

Hi Daniel,

thanks for the hint! - i was not aware of this rule.
Attached a new version of test program, which doesn't have this problem
anymore.

best regards,
Frank

[Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[FBergemann at web dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

Frank Bergemann <FBergemann at web dot de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #30194|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #3 from Frank Bergemann <FBergemann at web dot de> ---
Created attachment 30195
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30195&action=edit
fixed version of test program - compilation works now

missed to fix another location of invalid code - sorry
\Frank

[Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

--- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> ---
If you remove the still existing member initializer in func1, does the ICE
still exist? (On 4.9 after removal of that initializer I could compile and run
the program). Are all the compiler flags necessary to reproduce the ICE, or
will e.g. the combination of -Wall -std=c++11 suffice to produce the ICE?
>From gcc-bugs-return-423159-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat May 25 18:27:32 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-423159-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 22836 invoked by alias); 25 May 2013 18:27:32 -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 22796 invoked by uid 48); 25 May 2013 18:27:29 -0000
From: "daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 18:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: daniel.kruegler at googlemail 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:
Message-ID: <bug-57416-4-WMmLr63Af1@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57416-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57416-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg01832.txt.bz2
Content-length: 290

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

--- Comment #5 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> ---
(In reply to Daniel Krügler from comment #4)
We had a clash here, but except for my first observation the remaining
questions are still relevant.
>From gcc-bugs-return-423160-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat May 25 18:42:50 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-423160-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 29778 invoked by alias); 25 May 2013 18:42:50 -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 29753 invoked by uid 48); 25 May 2013 18:42:47 -0000
From: "su at cs dot ucdavis.edu" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/57417] New: hang on volatile int array
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 18:42:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
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: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
Message-ID: <bug-57417-4@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: 2013-05/txt/msg01833.txt.bz2
Content-length: 837

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idW417

            Bug ID: 57417
           Summary: hang on volatile int array
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.9.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: rtl-optimization
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: su at cs dot ucdavis.edu

The following code causes gcc trunk (and the 4.7 & 4.8 branches) to hang at -O1
or above. This seems to be different from 57381, but perhaps related.

$ gcc-trunk -v
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
gcc version 4.9.0 20130525 (experimental) [trunk revision 199323] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -m32 -O0 -c small.c
$ gcc-trunk -m32 -O1 -c small.c
^C
$ cat small.c
int a, b, c;

void foo ()
{
  volatile int d[1];
  b = 0;
  for (;; a--)
    c = (int)&d[b];
}

[Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[FBergemann at web dot de]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 4622 bytes --]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

--- Comment #6 from Frank Bergemann <FBergemann at web dot de> ---
the error depends on optimization level.
-O0 has the problem
-O1, -02, -03 do not have the problem.
For those i get - even for the original buggy code:

make all 
Building file: ../main.cpp
Invoking: GCC C++ Compiler
/opt/gcc-4.8.0/bin/g++ -O1 -g3 -Wall -c -std=c++11 -MMD -MP -MF"main.d"
-MT"main.d" -o "main.o" "../main.cpp"
../main.cpp: In function ‘void func3(PARENTDATA&) [with PARENTDATA =
func2(PARENTDATA&) [with PARENTDATA = func1(PARENTDATA&) [with PARENTDATA =
Nothing]::Data]::Data]’:
../main.cpp:23:47: warning: ‘p_parent_data’ may be used uninitialized in this
function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
  std::cout << "parent_data.parent_data.x = "  <<
data.parent_data.parent_data.x << std::endl;
                                               ^
../main.cpp: In function ‘void func2(PARENTDATA&) [with PARENTDATA =
func1(PARENTDATA&) [with PARENTDATA = Nothing]::Data]’:
../main.cpp:29:9: warning: ‘p_parent_data’ is used uninitialized in this
function [-Wuninitialized]
Finished building: ../main.cpp

Building target: RetainRecallOld
Invoking: GCC C++ Linker
/opt/gcc-4.8.0/bin/g++  -o "RetainRecallOld"  ./main.o   
  struct Data
         ^
../main.cpp: In function ‘void func1(PARENTDATA&) [with PARENTDATA = Nothing]’:
../main.cpp:43:9: warning: ‘p_parent_data’ is used uninitialized in this
function [-Wuninitialized]
  struct Data
         ^
Finished building target: RetainRecallOld


**** Build Finished ****
>From gcc-bugs-return-423164-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun May 26 01:35:57 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-423164-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 4982 invoked by alias); 26 May 2013 01:35:57 -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 4911 invoked by uid 89); 26 May 2013 01:35:45 -0000
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=4.3 required=5.0 testsºYES_80,FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2,IXHASH_X1,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (208.118.235.10)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 May 2013 01:35:44 +0000
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45059)	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)	(Exim 4.71)	id 1UgPs6-0003C0-51	for bug-gcc@gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 21:35:42 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)	id 1UgPrr-0005yX-82	for bug-gcc@gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 21:35:33 -0400
Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 01:35:00 -0000
X-Spam-Report: 	*  0.8 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is an abusable web server	*      [123.24.145.134 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]	*  1.4 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT	*      [123.24.145.134 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org]	*  3.3 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL	*      [123.24.145.134 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]	*  4.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%	*      [score: 1.0000]	*  2.1 FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2 FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2	*  2.3 FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_1 FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_1	*  2.5 RECEIVED_FROM_WINDOWS_HOST RECEIVED_FROM_WINDOWS_HOST	*  1.2 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO	*  0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS	*  1.4 MISSING_DATE Missing Date: header
Received: from [123.24.145.134] (port(938 helo\x123.24.145.134)	by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71)	id 1UgPrq-0005yM-7S	for bug-gcc@gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 21:35:27 -0400
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (lakovdd@mporum.ru@102.63.70.77)	by 123.24.145.134 with ESMTPA; Sun, 26 May 2013 09:36:33 +0800
From: lakovdd@mporum.ru
To: bug-gcc@gnu.org
Subject: Stocks On The Move
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Windows XP
Message-ID: <E1UgPrq-0005yM-7S@eggs.gnu.org>
X-Received-From: 123.24.145.134
X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg01837.txt.bz2
Content-length: 158

Secure a quick 300% with BY_SD. Price at just less then 1 cent!!!
Just Now a half of a penny. Determined to explode. Put in your bid
on Tue, May 28, 2013.

[Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |ice-on-invalid-code

--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Testcase still ICEs on the branch, errors on trunk.

[Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
The ICE is indeed fixed in mainline. I'm going to commit a (reduced) testcase
and close the issue.

[Bug c++/57416] internal compiler error: in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:4575

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57416

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.9.0

--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
Done.