This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Compiler crash with block numbers
The bug is in tree-eh.c. IS_UNKNOWN_LOCATION is mistakenly used, thus
the block info for a call stmt is cleared.
A patch to fix the problem is atached:
tree-eh.c (lower_try_finally_dup_block): Use correct way to
check unknown location.
--- tree-eh.c (revision 191494)
+++ tree-eh.c (working copy)
@@ -883,7 +883,7 @@ lower_try_finally_dup_block (gimple_seq seq, struc
new_seq = copy_gimple_seq_and_replace_locals (seq);
for (gsi = gsi_start (new_seq); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi))
- if (IS_UNKNOWN_LOCATION (gimple_location (gsi_stmt (gsi))))
+ if (gimple_location (gsi_stmt (gsi)) == UNKNOWN_LOCATION)
gimple_set_location (gsi_stmt (gsi), loc);
Is it ok for trunk?
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:47 AM, H.J. Lu <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Dehao Chen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Sure, I'll look into this problem today.
>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:25 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Dehao, I suspect that your recent patch changing block handling has
>>> broken bootstrap with --enable-languages=go. I reduced the test case
>>> to this C++ code:
>>> #include <string>
>>> f(bool is_string, bool is_constant)
>>> if (is_string)
>>> std::string left_string;
>>> std::string right_string;
>>> if (is_constant)
>>> return left_string + right_string;
>>> return "";
>>> When I compile that with current mainline with -O -g I get a crash
>>> (the backtrace is a local patch of mine):
>>> foo.cc: In function ‘std::string f(bool, bool)’:
>>> foo.cc:17:1: internal compiler error: tree check: expected block, have
>>> function_decl in change_scope, at final.c:1544
>>> 0xe388bd tree_check_failed(tree_node const*, char const*, int, char const*, ...)
>>> 0x50c495 tree_check(tree_node*, char const*, int, char const*, tree_code)
>>> 0x9372a1 change_scope
>>> 0x937646 reemit_insn_block_notes
>>> 0x937822 final_start_function(rtx_def*, _IO_FILE*, int)
>>> 0x93c6ad rest_of_handle_final
>>> Please submit a full bug report,
>>> with preprocessed source if appropriate.
>>> Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
>>> See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
>>> At first glance the bug is that the block obtained from insn_scope
>>> (insn), called from reemit_insn_block_notes, has a block number of 0.
>>> That leads to the crash in insn_scope.
>>> It's interesting that it only occurs with -g. I'm not sure what that means.
>>> Could you take a look at this and see if it is due to your patch?
> It may also cause: