From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id AA8AA3971C0A; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:20:30 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AA8AA3971C0A From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/97953] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1 Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:20:30 +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: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.5 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cf_known_to_work priority target_milestone keywords short_desc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:20:30 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97953 Richard Biener changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Known to work| |11.0 Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|--- |8.5 Keywords| |wrong-code Summary|ICE (segfault) during |[8/9/10 Regression] ICE |GIMPLE pass: loopdone |(segfault) during GIMPLE |compiling |pass: loopdone compiling |libgcc/config/libbid/bid128 |libgcc/config/libbid/bid128 |_fma.c:190:1 |_fma.c:190:1 --- Comment #21 from Richard Biener --- Fixed on trunk, still broken on branches. Note the hoisting re-ordering ma= de us no longer discover the full redundancy in PRE itself (as written in the originating PR we would need to iterate and PRE insertion discovering full redundancies is a bit of a corner case as well).=