[Bug c++/67055] New: Segmentation fault in fold_builtin_alloca_with_align in tree-ssa-ccp.c

["balder@yahoo-inc.com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67055

            Bug ID: 67055
           Summary: Segmentation fault in fold_builtin_alloca_with_align
                    in tree-ssa-ccp.c
           Product: gcc
           Version: 5.2.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: major
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: balder@yahoo-inc.com
  Target Milestone: ---

Created attachment 36087
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36087&action=edit
This is the full output from the build with stdout and stdin redirected to
file.

When upgrading our compiler version from 4.9.3 to 5.2.0 our build fails with
following message.

....
....
In file included from mallocdst16.cpp:31:0:
../../vespamalloc/malloc/overload.h: In function ‘void* operator
new(std::size_t, const std::nothrow_t&)’:
../../vespamalloc/malloc/overload.h:41:7: internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault
 void* operator new(std::size_t sz, const std::nothrow_t&) noexcept {
       ^
0xa34c65 crash_signal
        ../.././gcc/toplev.c:383
0xaf7486 fold_builtin_alloca_with_align
        ../.././gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c:2066
0xaf7486 ccp_fold_stmt
        ../.././gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c:2172
0xb6738a substitute_and_fold_dom_walker::before_dom_children(basic_block_def*)
        ../.././gcc/tree-ssa-propagate.c:1176
0xfcdd3a dom_walker::walk(basic_block_def*)
        ../.././gcc/domwalk.c:188
0xb65a1b substitute_and_fold(tree_node* (*)(tree_node*), bool
(*)(gimple_stmt_iterator*), bool)
        ../.././gcc/tree-ssa-propagate.c:1272
0xaf196b ccp_finalize
        ../.././gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c:941
0xaf2adf do_ssa_ccp
        ../.././gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c:2382
0xaf2adf execute
        ../.././gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c:2414
Please submit a full bug report,
...
...
>From gcc-bugs-return-493638-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Jul 29 10:51:59 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-493638-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 44064 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2015 10:51:59 -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 43535 invoked by uid 48); 29 Jul 2015 10:51:56 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/66752] spec2000 255.vortex performance compiled with GCC is ~20% lower than with CLANG
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:51:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-66752-4-10GZ4bV2co@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66752-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66752-4@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: 2015-07/txt/msg02528.txt.bz2
Content-length: 428

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf752

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

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

--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Reopen.