From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 9F4BB3858D26; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 09:44:24 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9F4BB3858D26
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1721641464;
	bh=xELlxukTv+U/+DAkTiL7l8i65YglucEc/AvH4F4qhjU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=jb8IoBGKEZnf8RQdRPR0SwQXm22pN+EY2CFaKZ04SEzarBATyqMAeowkPsUM/D96m
	 z1wt3WcYxObg971OqWC3jL8Spge6b0cUHUhI3nxBM5Awb6K7XDe0LGVk72m2v+044E
	 bYM/DAjKZ5CsEVYoHJu+LHd9XkA2sBV/GRrOLWCU=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/89270] [12/13 regression] AVR ICE: verify_gimple failed
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 09:44:20 +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: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: addr-space, ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-89270-4-LC3xq6C1Ye@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-89270-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-89270-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D89270

--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #16)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> > Fixed on trunk sofar.  Joseph correctly mentioned that iff AVR would de=
fine
> > __int24 using INT_N in avr-modes.def the issue would have been mitigate=
d as
> > well
> > (that's a comparatively "modern" way of registering additional integer
> > types).
> >=20
> > So it's really also a target issue.
>=20
> INT_N isn't even mentioned in the internals documentation.
>=20
> And are you saying that FRACTIONAL_INT_MODE is bogus or broken by design?

No, INT_N is just a convenient way to add new builtin types that are
accessible as [u]intN_t to the user.  Those happened to be considered
already for the conversions.=