[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-08 20:11 --- Fixed. --- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-08 20:11 --- Subject: Bug 18299 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2

[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-08 20:11 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-08 19:47 --- Patch here: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-08 19:19 --- Created an attachment (id=7493) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7493&action=view) patch which I am testing This patch fixes the bug in the tree-inliner but I want to make sure that we on

[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-08 14:48 --- (stupid thing was failing for a while before 3.4): : Search converges between 2004-05-11-trunk (#454) and 2004-05-14-trunk (#455). And we have been failing on the tree-ssa for a long time (since at least 2

[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-08 13:53 --- : Search converges between 2003-07-29-trunk (#308) and 2003-07-30-trunk (#309). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18299

[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-04 19:52 --- Confirmed, here is the reduced testcase: static inline int f(int i) { const int __t = (__t); } int g(void) { return f(0); } -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-04 19:48 --- note the code will not work as you have "const tree __t = (__t);" in the code. I will see if I can reduce it as this should not be that important. This is why macros are bad. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bu

[Bug middle-end/18299] [4.0 Regression] ICE in gimple-lower

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-04 19:19 --- Confimed, reducing (gimple-lowering is crapping out on VAR_DECL, it could also crap out on INDIRECT_REF, and COMPONENT_REF which are valid gimple statements). -- What|Removed