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 2471C3950C48; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:09:29 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 2471C3950C48
From: "amacleod at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/97360] [11 Regression] ICE in range_on_exit
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:09:29 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: amacleod at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-97360-4-eNtCi26Cj7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-97360-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-97360-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:09:30 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97360

--- Comment #11 from Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #10)
> Here's elf32-arc.i creduced.
>=20
> a;
> b();
> c() {
>   void *d;
>   if (d =3D=3D b && e())


is that actually allowed?

if (d =3D=3D b) is=20
   void * =3D=3D (void * ())

I was under the impression that void * and pointers to functions were not
compatible?    I notice we don't issue a warning, and let it go tho.

The problem is "different" than the original problem.   yes, they trigger in
the same place, but this is a comparison of !types_compatible_p() which I
didn't think was allowed without a cast?=