public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/94598] [10 Regression] ICE in verify_sra_access_forest, at tree-sra.c:2360 with -O1 or higher since r10-6321-g636e80eea24b780f
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 09:07:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-94598-4-XZjSP2YfiT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-94598-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94598

--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor <jamborm@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bd87b1fddbbe7d424671ebf81c96e12d748fafc7

commit r10-7751-gbd87b1fddbbe7d424671ebf81c96e12d748fafc7
Author: Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>
Date:   Thu Apr 16 11:04:41 2020 +0200

    sra: Fix access verification (PR 94598)

    get_ref_base_and_extent recognizes ARRAY_REFs with variable index but
    into arrays of length one as constant offset accesses.  However,
    max_size in such cases is extended to span the whole element.  This
    confuses SRA verification when SRA also builds its (total
    scalarization) access structures to describe fields under such array -
    get_ref_base_and_extent returns different size and max_size for them.

    Fixed by not performing the check for total scalarization accesses.
    The subsequent check then had to be changed to use size and not
    max_size too, which meant it has to be skipped when the access
    structure describes a genuine variable array access.

    Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.

    2020-04-16  Martin Jambor  <mjambor@suse.cz>

            PR tree-optimization/94598
            * tree-sra.c (verify_sra_access_forest): Fix verification of total
            scalarization accesses under access to one-element arrays.

            testsuite/
            * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr94598.c: New test.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-04-16  9:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-14 17:50 [Bug tree-optimization/94598] New: ICE in verify_sra_access_forest, at tree-sra.c:2360 with -O1 or higher delia.burduv at arm dot com
2020-04-15  5:27 ` [Bug tree-optimization/94598] [10 Regression] ICE in verify_sra_access_forest, at tree-sra.c:2360 with -O1 or higher since r10-6321-g636e80eea24b780f marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-15  7:33 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-15 10:02 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-15 13:38 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-15 15:34 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16  9:07 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2020-04-16  9:40 ` jamborm 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-94598-4-XZjSP2YfiT@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: link
Be 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).