[Bug middle-end/42363] [4.5 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed for gcc.c-torture/compile/pr37913.c -O1 -g
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Wed Jan 6 16:48:00 GMT 2010
------- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 16:48 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> By the same argument, shouldn't we drop the assignment early, and make it a
> non-assigning call?
Sure - fixing this during gimplification would be fine with me. I'm not
sure it cannot happen via later folding an indirect call to a call that
we only then figure is noreturn (maybe there is folding already for that
case - you might want to double-check).
> The assignment is also supposed to occur after the call,
> although it's not denoted in a separate statement, but SSA analysis doesn't
> complain about it. Shouldn't it?
Well, the assignment in a call stmt is after the call. So we just
define it to be correct (I can't see of a better way encoding it - see
also the issues with exceptions).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42363
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list