This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/81297] [8 Regression] ICE in get_single_symbol
- From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 07:30:45 +0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/81297] [8 Regression] ICE in get_single_symbol
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-81297-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81297
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmpf. So the assert was to make sure we do not introduce OVF stuff in symbolic
ranges (it should better have been in set_value_range). But yes, generic
folding is susceptible to introduce it, esp. with -fwrapv :/
The easiest "fix" is to remove the assert. But OTOH the best fix would be to
stop setting TREE_OVERFLOW alltogether... or at least for where overflow
is (implementation) defined.
I will eventually look into this after I return from vacation.