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 42025384B825; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 08:29:49 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 42025384B825
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/98549] [11 Regression] ICE in rs6000_emit_le_vsx_store,
 at config/rs6000/rs6000.c:9938 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 08:29:47 +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: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
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-98549-4-3HtR6e5m2b@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-98549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-98549-4@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: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 08:29:49 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D98549

--- Comment #11 from Martin Li=C5=A1ka <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #10)
> (And that new test case is full of obvious invalid code as well, fwiw.)

Wait here. Changing the code to:

long compress_n_blocks =3D 0;
void GOST_34_11::compress_n() {
  for (long i =3D 0; i < compress_n_blocks; ++i) {
    unsigned char S[32], S2[32];

the function GOST_34_11::compress_n now does not execute at all. Thus it sh=
ould
not consider an invalid code. Can you please prove where the invalid code?

Moreover, the test-case comes from the original Botan benchmark:
https://github.com/randombit/botan

I'm able to run the benchmark with Sanitizers enabled, so I really don't th=
ink
it contains an invalid code.=