[Bug tree-optimization/60823] New: ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] New: ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[ysrumyan at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

            Bug ID: 60823
           Summary: ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.9.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: tree-optimization
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: ysrumyan at gmail dot com

We noticed that adding 'const' qualifier to function arguments marked with simd
declare pragma leads to issue ICE on attached test-case. Test is compiled
successfully if 'const' was deleted. To reproduce failure the following command
line options are needed: -O1  -m64  test.cpp -c -fopenmp.

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[ysrumyan at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

--- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrumyan at gmail dot com> ---
Created attachment 32585
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32585&action=edit
C++ test-case to reproduce

Need to be compiled with -O1  -m64  test.cpp -c -fopenmp options to reproduce
ICE.

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-04-14
      Known to work|                            |4.8.3
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.9.1
            Summary|ICE in gimple_expand_cfg,   |[4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE
                   |at cfgexpand.c:5644         |in gimple_expand_cfg, at
                   |                            |cfgexpand.c:5644
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
      Known to fail|                            |4.9.0

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.  Some out-of-SSA issue it seems.

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 32618
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32618&action=edit
gcc49-pr60823.patch

Untested work in progress patch.  We weren't adjusting PHIs (arguments or
result vars), but what the code was doing was simply wrong anyway whenever
there would be an overlap between SSA_NAMEs refering to the same PARM_DECL. 
This patch should fix that, and contains testcases for both ice-on-valid and
wrong-code without the patch, but I'll still need to look at handling of
addressable parameters that are requested to be vectorized plus write testcases
for that.

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #32618|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 32624
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32624&action=edit
gcc49-pr60823.patch

Updated (still untested) patch.

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 22 10:21:32 2014
New Revision: 209616

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209616&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
    PR tree-optimization/60823
    * omp-low.c (ipa_simd_modify_function_body): Go through
    all SSA_NAMEs and for those refering to vector arguments
    which are going to be replaced adjust SSA_NAME_VAR and,
    if it is a default definition, change it into a non-default
    definition assigned at the beginning of function from new_decl.
    (ipa_simd_modify_stmt_ops): Rewritten.
    * tree-dfa.c (set_ssa_default_def): When removing default def,
    check for NULL loc instead of NULL *loc.

    * c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-1.c: New test.
    * c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-2.c: New test.
    * c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-3.c: New test.

Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-1.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-2.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-3.c
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/omp-low.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/tree-dfa.c

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 22 13:16:31 2014
New Revision: 209626

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209626&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
    PR tree-optimization/60823
    * omp-low.c (ipa_simd_modify_function_body): Go through
    all SSA_NAMEs and for those refering to vector arguments
    which are going to be replaced adjust SSA_NAME_VAR and,
    if it is a default definition, change it into a non-default
    definition assigned at the beginning of function from new_decl.
    (ipa_simd_modify_stmt_ops): Rewritten.
    * tree-dfa.c (set_ssa_default_def): When removing default def,
    check for NULL loc instead of NULL *loc.

    * c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-1.c: New test.
    * c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-2.c: New test.
    * c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-3.c: New test.

Added:
    branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-1.c
    branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-2.c
    branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/pr60823-3.c
Modified:
    branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
    branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/omp-low.c
    branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/tree-dfa.c

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
      Known to work|                            |4.10.0, 4.9.1
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

vincenzo Innocente <vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch

--- Comment #9 from vincenzo Innocente <vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch> ---
sorry fro squatting this thread:
I noticed that compiling the test case for haswell it does not make use of umm
registers
c++ -std=c++11 -Ofast -fopenmp -S simdCloning.cc -march=haswell;  grep ymm
simdCloning.s
    vmovupd    %ymm0, -80(%rbp)
    vmovupd    %ymm1, -48(%rbp)
    vmovapd    %ymm0, -80(%rbp)
    vmovapd    %ymm1, -48(%rbp)
    vmovdqa    -112(%rbp), %ymm0

changing int to long long does not make any effect...
same changing double to float and widening the simdlen to 8.

any "good" reason?
should I open a new bug report (tree-optimization I suppose)?

[Bug tree-optimization/60823] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gimple_expand_cfg, at cfgexpand.c:5644

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60823

--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to vincenzo Innocente from comment #9)
> sorry fro squatting this thread:
> I noticed that compiling the test case for haswell it does not make use of
> umm registers
> c++ -std=c++11 -Ofast -fopenmp -S simdCloning.cc -march=haswell;  grep ymm
> simdCloning.s
> 	vmovupd	%ymm0, -80(%rbp)
> 	vmovupd	%ymm1, -48(%rbp)
> 	vmovapd	%ymm0, -80(%rbp)
> 	vmovapd	%ymm1, -48(%rbp)
> 	vmovdqa	-112(%rbp), %ymm0
> 
> changing int to long long does not make any effect...
> same changing double to float and widening the simdlen to 8.
> 
> any "good" reason?
> should I open a new bug report (tree-optimization I suppose)?

If you look into the -fdump-tree-vect-details dump, you'll see it is not
vectorized at all, I guess the primary issue is the nested loop in there, I
guess you were expecting that the 4 or 8 outer loop (the compiler added)
iterations will be vectorized and just get execute the inner loop which has
fixed number of iterations and doesn't have any conditionals.  But that is not
what our vectorizer supports unfortunately, for nested loops it instead
attempts to vectorize consecutive iterations of the inner loop (which doesn't
of course work here, because the iterations depend on each other).
>From gcc-bugs-return-451873-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon May 19 07:40:23 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-451873-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14284 invoked by alias); 19 May 2014 07:40:22 -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 14211 invoked by uid 48); 19 May 2014 07:40:18 -0000
From: "alexey.merzlyakov at samsung dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/60758] Infinite backtrace in  __cxa_end_cleanup
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 07:40:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: alexey.merzlyakov at samsung 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-60758-4-79eB1AcaGK@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-60758-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-60758-4@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: 2014-05/txt/msg01565.txt.bz2
Content-length: 248

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id`758

--- Comment #6 from Alexey Merzlyakov <alexey.merzlyakov at samsung dot com> ---
The issue was reproduced at my side.
Let me make necessary investigations to fix the problem as soon as possible.