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 9A358385042A; Wed,  4 Aug 2021 11:51:26 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9A358385042A
From: "jakub 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 11:51:26 +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: jakub 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-q43RZ3xFYe@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 11:51:26 -0000

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

--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> I disagree - syntactically valid input should not crash the compiler or m=
ake
> it slow.  Yes, fixing cases with obvious non-sensical input might be low
> priority, but the exposed issues are often also issues for "correct"
> programs.

Yeah.
I don't think ICEs/compiler hangs etc. on syntactically valid programs with=
 UB
somewhere in it should be low priority, UB happens at runtime when some
statement is encountered and perhaps certain conditions are met, but there =
is
no guarantee those conditions will be met in the testcase at runtime or the
statement will be encountered.
Then there are ICEs/compiler hangs etc. on syntactically invalid programs, =
if
it happens without reporting errors the priority isn't much lower, if it
happens after reporting errors it is much lower priority (error recovery bu=
gs).
Of course, for programs that invoke UB at runtime, anything that happens du=
ring
the runtime after encountering the UB is a non-bug.=