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 D9A203861834; Wed,  4 Aug 2021 11:37:11 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D9A203861834
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/99694] [9 Regression] gcc: fatal error: Killed
 signal terminated program cc1 under -O2 to -Os since
 r9-7156-g33579b59aaf02eb7
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2021 11:37:11 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: compile-time-hog
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-99694-4-fZgNrnFUna@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-99694-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-99694-4@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: Wed, 04 Aug 2021 11:37:12 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99694

--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Li=C5=A1ka from comment #12)
> > I am asking the question because I am thinking whether the effort is
> > worthing or not if I devise a tool that can produce diverse syntactic v=
alid
> > but may contain UB test programs to detect crashes or performance issue=
s in
> > compilers. The motivation is that I noticed the goal of most existing
> > program generators (e.g.,Csmith [1], YARPGen [2]) is to produce UB-free=
 test
> > programs to detect miscompiliation bugs in compilers, few (only CCG [3]=
, a
> > quite old tool so that may be hard to find bugs right now) aims to dete=
ct
> > crashs using programs with UB. So I guess our community may lack such t=
est
> > cases to further stress compilers. If such diverse test programs (such =
as
> > the reported one) can help improve the quality of compilers, I'd like to
> > spend some time on it.
>=20
> I would not spend much time on it. It's pretty easy to create an invalid
> input
> which cause compiler to crash. What's more interesting are valid inputs t=
hat
> lead
> to a wrong-code. That's why all these tools try having UBSAN free input.

I disagree - syntactically valid input should not crash the compiler or mak=
e it
slow.  Yes, fixing cases with obvious non-sensical input might be low prior=
ity,
but the exposed issues are often also issues for "correct" programs.=