public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/65875] [5/6 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 16:37:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-65875-4-2979xrPHaT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-65875-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65875 Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Created attachment 35395 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35395&action=edit gcc5-pr65875.patch Untested fix. IMHO vrp_visit_phi_node was missing the vr_result VR_VARING handling if the value range turned into varying only during update_value_range, and also update_value_range wasn't telling the caller if it changed it into varying late. That said, the testcase has conditionally undefined variable, and checking whether all the VRP decisions (first and second pass) are sane, would be nice, Richard, could you please have a look? E.g. I find it strange that h has VR [0, LONG_MAX] before VRP2, when it really has just values 0 or 1, so should be ideally [0, 1]. Or that i has value range [1, LONG_MAX] - it is conditionally undefined (that is ignored), and conditionally negation of an int variable (only if that int variable is negative). The negated int variable is [1, +INF(OVF)] because INT_MIN might overflow, perhaps if we really need to preserve the OVF flag, we have to use [1, +INF(OVF)] again rather than just [1, 0x7fffffff] :(.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-24 16:37 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2015-04-24 12:16 [Bug c/65875] New: internal compiler error with gcc 5.1 megahallon at gmail dot com 2015-04-24 12:29 ` [Bug tree-optimization/65875] [5/6 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-04-24 16:37 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2015-04-27 9:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-04-27 11:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-04-27 12:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-04-27 12:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-04-28 7:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-04-28 8:16 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-04-28 8:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-65875-4-2979xrPHaT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).