This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/67305] New: [6 Regression] gcc.c-torture/compile/20121027-1.c ICE
- From: "jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:55:11 +0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/67305] New: [6 Regression] gcc.c-torture/compile/20121027-1.c ICE
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67305
Bug ID: 67305
Summary: [6 Regression] gcc.c-torture/compile/20121027-1.c ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: vmakarov at redhat dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Target: arm-none-eabi
since r226850, seen on arm-none-eabi only currently.
it can be easily reproduced by the following command. -mfpu and -mfloat are
necessary.
./cc1 -O3 -nostdinc 20121027-1.c -march=armv8-a -mthumb
-mfpu=crypto-neon-fp-armv8 -mfloat-abi=hard
cross cc1 is generated from
../gcc/configure --target=arm-none-eabi --enable-languages=c,c++
t.c:13:1: internal compiler error: in decompose_normal_address, at
rtlanal.c:6090
}
^
0xc94a37 decompose_normal_address
/space/rguenther/tramp3d/trunk/gcc/rtlanal.c:6090
0xc94d25 decompose_address(address_info*, rtx_def**, machine_mode,
unsigned char, rtx_code)
/space/rguenther/tramp3d/trunk/gcc/rtlanal.c:6167
0xc94dc3 decompose_mem_address(address_info*, rtx_def*)
/space/rguenther/tramp3d/trunk/gcc/rtlanal.c:6187
0xb61149 process_address_1
/space/rguenther/tramp3d/trunk/gcc/lra-constraints.c:2867
0xb61c4e process_address
/space/rguenther/tramp3d/trunk/gcc/lra-constraints.c:3124
0xb62607 curr_insn_transform
/space/rguenther/tramp3d/trunk/gcc/lra-constraints.c:3419
0xb65250 lra_constraints(bool)
/space/rguenther/tramp3d/trunk/gcc/lra-constraints.c:4421
Richard's initial comments
that looks like a latent issue to me in an area of GCC I am not
familiar with. I suggest to open a bugreport and CC Vladimir.
The r226850 change caused us to eliminate an induction variable
early (I suspect IVOPTs would have done this later anyway, but
I did not verify that):
Replaced redundant PHI node defining bl_2 with c_1
Replaced c_1 + 1 with bl_15 in all uses of c_16 = c_1 + 1;
Removing dead stmt c_16 = c_1 + 1;
Removing dead stmt bl_2 = PHI <0(2), bl_15(3)>