https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107172
Bug ID: 107172
Summary: wrong code with "-O1 -ftree-vrp" on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107194
Bug ID: 107194
Summary: wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107195
Bug ID: 107195
Summary: wrong code with "-O1 -fno-tree-ccp" on
x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107229
Bug ID: 107229
Summary: ICE at -O1 and -Os with "-ftree-vectorize":
verify_gimple failed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107269
Bug ID: 107269
Summary: wrong code at -O1 and above with "-fno-tree-ccp" on
x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107269
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
A related instance:
[537] % gcctk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcctk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/local/suz-local/software/local/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/13.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107269
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
Another related instance:
[642] % gcctk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcctk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/local/suz-local/software/local/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/13.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107273
Bug ID: 107273
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107273
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Likely a related instance (although it fails also at -Os and -O2 besides -O3).
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/rdajs47K6
[515] % gcctk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcctk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107273
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
Another likely related instance that is miscompiled at -O1 and above.
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/xqz7f4c7v
[570] % gcctk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcctk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/local/su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107273
--- Comment #3 from Zhendong Su ---
Another likely related instance that is miscompiled at -Os, -O2 and -O3.
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/3TbG51Ph3
[628] % gcctk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcctk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/local
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
Bug ID: 103860
Summary: wrong code at -O3 with -fPIC on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103873
Bug ID: 103873
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104279
Bug ID: 104279
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O1 and above on
x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_gimple failed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104279
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
>From Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/465M9Kvx1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104280
Bug ID: 104280
Summary: wrong code at -O1 and above
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104280
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
It might be related to PR 104279.
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/szrGT9E7T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104281
Bug ID: 104281
Summary: wrong code at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104281
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/ovnrnEGj6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104519
Bug ID: 104519
Summary: wrong code at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104519
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
>From Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/s7Eco5EGb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104521
Bug ID: 104521
Summary: wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104521
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
>From Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/Y37Wo9e8c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104543
Bug ID: 104543
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104543
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
>From Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/s1WW4snzM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103079
Bug ID: 103079
Summary: wrong code at -Os and -O2 on x86_64-linux-gnu (the
generated code hangs)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103152
Bug ID: 103152
Summary: wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103188
Bug ID: 103188
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu:
Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103231
Bug ID: 103231
Summary: ICE (nondeterministic) on valid code at -O1 on
x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103231
--- Comment #6 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #5)
> Simplified test-case:
Oh, great; thanks, Martin!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103231
--- Comment #9 from Zhendong Su ---
A very simple repro (with ulimit -s 32):
[530] % compile.sh small.c
*** Compiling with: gcctk -O1 small.c
gcctk: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault signal terminated program
cc1
Please submit a full
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103300
Bug ID: 103300
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103314
Bug ID: 103314
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O1 and above on
x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103314
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
BT below:
#0 0x011ee287 in wi::fits_to_tree_p > > > (x=...,
type=0x765f15e8) at ../../gcc-trunk/gcc/tree.h:6263
#1 0x011ddf6f in force_fit_type (type=type@entry=0x765f15e8,
cst=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103376
Bug ID: 103376
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103376
--- Comment #7 from Zhendong Su ---
A couple of additional tests for the same issue:
(1) at -Os and above
[622] % gcctk -O1 small.c; ./a.out
[623] % gcctk -Os small.c; ./a.out
Aborted
[624] % cat small.c
long a = 2653121401;
unsigned char b;
i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102902
--- Comment #6 from Zhendong Su ---
Hi Richard, I just noticed that this issue was mis-categorized as a duplicate
of 102920, which was filed later. It's not very important, but it would
probably be nice to correctly label the issues in the bug t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103417
Bug ID: 103417
Summary: wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103440
Bug ID: 103440
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103464
Bug ID: 103464
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O1 (with -ftree-vrp and ulimit
-s 512) on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103464
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Backtrace:
#0 irange::irange (nranges=255, base=0x7ff7edd0, this=0x7ff7edc0)
at ../../gcc-trunk/gcc/value-range.h:400
#1 int_range<255u>::int_range (this=0x7ff7edc0) at
../../gcc-trunk/gcc/v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103464
--- Comment #6 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Started with r12-5522-g661c02e54ea72fb5, note that ulimit -s 600 works fine
> and I'm not fully convinced such a small stack limit should be an issue?
>
> Shouldn'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103464
--- Comment #9 from Zhendong Su ---
Created attachment 51893
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51893&action=edit
partially reduced test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103464
--- Comment #10 from Zhendong Su ---
> Can you please attach the original test-case?
Added.
This was a partially reduced test; the original was:
15041 70889 783444 t.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103464
--- Comment #12 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> (In reply to Zhendong Su from comment #9)
> > Created attachment 51893 [details]
> > partially reduced test
>
> What's your default (unreduced) ulimit -s?
819
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103486
Bug ID: 103486
Summary: ICE on valid code at -Os and above on
x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103300
--- Comment #6 from Zhendong Su ---
Another test likely for the same issue:
[652] % gcctk -O3 small.c; ./a.out
Aborted
[653] % gcctk -O2 -floop-unroll-and-jam small.c; ./a.out
Aborted
[654] % cat small.c
int printf(const char *, ...);
int a[2],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103513
Zhendong Su changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102131
--- Comment #9 from Zhendong Su ---
Perhaps the following is due to the same root cause?
[558] % gcctk -O0 small.c; ./a.out
[559] % gcctk -O1 small.c; ./a.out
Aborted
[560] % cat small.c
int a;
int main() {
unsigned b = 0;
for (a = 2; a < 8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102087
Bug ID: 102087
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: in
determine_exit_conditions, at
tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:1049
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102131
Bug ID: 102131
Summary: wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102364
Bug ID: 102364
Summary: wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102403
Zhendong Su changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102446
Bug ID: 102446
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102546
--- Comment #7 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #6)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > I think it's similar to in the other PR, with old EVRP when visiting BB 8
>
> BTW, which is this other PR, so I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102636
Bug ID: 102636
Summary: wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102645
Bug ID: 102645
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu:
Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102736
Bug ID: 102736
Summary: wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102769
Bug ID: 102769
Summary: wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102769
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
Interesting --- it was missed by clang-10 sanitizers and the CompCert
interpreter (a pretty rare occurrence):
[565] % ccomp -interp -fall small.c
small.c:13: warning: implicit declaration of function '__buil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102769
--- Comment #5 from Zhendong Su ---
Yes, it's clear that the code is invalid. I should update my reduction script
to use more recent clang and gcc for ruling out UBs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102769
--- Comment #7 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> (In reply to Zhendong Su from comment #5)
> > Yes, it's clear that the code is invalid. I should update my reduction
> > script to use more recent clang and gcc for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102769
--- Comment #9 from Zhendong Su ---
> Don't apologize, you have created very many wrong-code issues.
> We appreciate the effort of your team.
Thanks, Martin :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102769
--- Comment #11 from Zhendong Su ---
> s/created/reported/
> We as GCC developers have created them.
Thanks for this clarification, Jakob :)
> Anyway, thanks for all the bug reports.
Sure thing. Thanks to all you folks for the great work in m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102830
Bug ID: 102830
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102902
Bug ID: 102902
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu (generated code
hangs)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103006
Bug ID: 103006
Summary: wrong code at -O2 (only) on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107523
Bug ID: 107523
Summary: wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107541
Bug ID: 107541
Summary: wrong code at -O1, -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107833
Bug ID: 107833
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107935
Bug ID: 107935
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O3: in set_ssa_val_to, at
tree-ssa-sccvn.cc:5011
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107937
Zhendong Su changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108007
Bug ID: 108007
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above with "-fno-dce
-fno-tree-dce" on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108139
Bug ID: 108139
Summary: wrong code with "-O1 -ftree-vrp" on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108148
Bug ID: 108148
Summary: ICE on valid code with "-O3
-fno-inline-functions-called-once
-fno-inline-small-functions -fno-tree-ccp
-fno-tree-dce -fno-tree-vrp" on x86
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108164
Bug ID: 108164
Summary: wrong code with "-O3 -fno-tree-dce" on
x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108308
Bug ID: 108308
Summary: wrong code at -Os and -O2 with "-fno-tree-ccp" on
x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105665
Bug ID: 105665
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105665
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/jsT5Evv54
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106032
Bug ID: 106032
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106032
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/PnTzaKsf4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106073
Bug ID: 106073
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106073
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/o3jq85vYK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106112
Bug ID: 106112
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106112
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/v6qY9d6q6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106114
Bug ID: 106114
Summary: wrong code at -O1, -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106114
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/T38WEd376
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106115
Bug ID: 106115
Summary: wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106115
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/Pa3xqsE3E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106114
--- Comment #6 from Zhendong Su ---
Two additional recent miscompiles that are likedly related:
(1)
[638] % gcctk -O0 small.c; ./a.out
[639] % gcctk -O1 small.c
[640] % ./a.out
Aborted
[641] % cat small.c
int a, b;
int main() {
int c = 0, d,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106171
Bug ID: 106171
Summary: wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106171
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/eEhKn8x9T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106171
--- Comment #3 from Zhendong Su ---
Yes, you're right, Jakub.
Then, it's a false negative for the sanitizers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106171
Zhendong Su changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106171
--- Comment #7 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> And -O1 -Wall warns:
> pr106171.c: In function ‘c’:
> pr106171.c:10:15: warning: ‘e[0]’ is used uninitialized [-Wuninitialized]
>10 | return e[0];
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106194
Bug ID: 106194
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: in
check_loop_closed_ssa_def, at
tree-ssa-loop-manip.cc:717
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106194
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Most likely a dup of bug 106182.
Yes, it should be.
Sorry for the dup (the dup checker didn't show PR106182).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106194
Zhendong Su changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106182
Zhendong Su changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106198
Zhendong Su changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch
--- Commen
101 - 200 of 387 matches
Mail list logo