On Jun 6, 2012, at 10:45 AM, Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan wrote: > Hi Tristan, > >> how result can be used uninitialized as it is assigned just before > > I am sorry. My mistake. I had replaced expand_expr_addr_expr_1 with > convert_memory_address_addr_space. I overlooked the patch as > > - result = expand_expr_addr_expr_1 (inner, subtarget, tmode, modifier, as); > + result = convert_memory_address_addr_space (tmode, result, as); > > Hence replaced expand_expr_addr_expr_1 with convert_memory_address_addr_space.
That explains the crash too! Tristan. > > Regards, > Kannan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tristan Gingold [mailto:ging...@adacore.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 1:17 PM > To: Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan > Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: regression due to r187199 explow.c? in target ia64-hp-hpux11.23. > > > On Jun 6, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan wrote: > >> Hi Tristan, >> >>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg00970.html >>> I have not applied this patch. I will give it a try. >> >> This patch is not fixing the issue. >> Moreover, on compiling expr.c I get this warning: >> ..../gcc/expr.c: In function 'expand_expr_addr_expr_1': >> ..../gcc/expr.c:7603:10: warning: 'result' may be used uninitialized in >> this function. > > That's looking weird. I don't see how result can be used uninitialized as it > is assigned just before. > > Tristan. > >> For the same testcase, now the ICE is happening in different place (while >> compiling the same line of code): >> test.c: In function 'main': >> test.c:5:7: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault >> boo (&iarr[1]); >> ^ >> >> ---- Stack trace got through gdb: >> >> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault >> si_code: 2 - SEGV_ACCERR - Invalid Permissions for object. >> 0x6c9dd60:1 in adjust_address_1 (memref=0x6544a140, mode=SImode, offset=-4, >> validate=1, adjust=1) >> (gdb) bt >> #0 0x6c9dd60:1 in adjust_address_1 (memref=0x6544a140, mode=SImode, >> offset=-4, validate=1, adjust=1) >> #1 0x957a110:0 in gen_lowpart_general (mode=SImode, x=0x6544a140) >> #2 0x6ee33e0:0 in convert_modes (mode=SImode, oldmode=DImode, x=0x6544a140, >> unsignedp=-1) >> #3 0x6dbc600:0 in convert_memory_address_addr_space (to_mode=SImode, >> x=0x6544a140, as=0 '\000') >> #4 0x6f39a60:0 in expand_expr_addr_expr_1 (exp=0x6544a140, target=0x0, >> tmode=SImode, modifier=EXPAND_NORMAL, as=0 '\000') >> #5 0x6f3ad50:0 in expand_expr_addr_expr (exp=0x65453678, target=0x0, >> tmode=SImode, modifier=EXPAND_NORMAL) >> #6 0x6f67f90:0 in expand_expr_real_1 (exp=0x65453678, target=0x0, >> tmode=VOIDmode, modifier=EXPAND_NORMAL, alt_rtl=0x0) >> #7 0x6f3c700:0 in expand_expr_real (exp=0x65453678, target=0x0, >> tmode=VOIDmode, modifier=EXPAND_NORMAL, alt_rtl=0x0) >> #8 0x5d4dda0:0 in expand_normal (exp=0x65453678) >> #9 0x5d8dce0:0 in precompute_register_parameters (num_actuals=1, >> args=0x7fffd8a0, reg_parm_seen=0x7fffdc88) >> #10 0x5da2160:0 in expand_call (exp=0x6544a258, target=0x0, ignore=1) >> #11 0x6f637c0:0 in expand_expr_real_1 (exp=0x6544a258, target=0x0, >> tmode=VOIDmode, modifier=EXPAND_NORMAL, alt_rtl=0x0) >> #12 0x5f6d760:0 in expand_call_stmt (stmt=0x6545c0b0) >> #13 0x5f6da90:0 in expand_gimple_stmt_1 (stmt=0x6545c0b0) >> >> Testcase, GCC configuration, etc in the original post: >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-05/msg00371.html >> >> Regards, >> Kannan >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan >> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 2:44 PM >> To: 'Tristan Gingold' >> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org >> Subject: RE: regression due to r187199 explow.c? in target ia64-hp-hpux11.23. >> >> Thanks Tristan. I have not applied this patch. I will give it a try. >> >> Regards, >> Kannan >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Tristan Gingold [mailto:ging...@adacore.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 1:46 PM >> To: Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan >> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org >> Subject: Re: regression due to r187199 explow.c? in target ia64-hp-hpux11.23. >> >> Hi, >> >> did you try with this patch: >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg00970.html >> >> Tristan. >> >> On May 29, 2012, at 12:23 PM, Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This modification (assertion) is causing failure in ia64-hp-hpux11.23: >>> >>> r187199 | rsandifo | 2012-05-05 10:41:49 -0700 (Sat, 05 May 2012) | 247 >>> lines >>> Changed paths: >>> M /trunk/gcc/explow.c >>> * explow.c (plus_constant, plus_constant_mode): Likewise. Assert that >>> the mode is sensible. >>> >>> Haven't analyzed the issue. Thought of checking, if it is a known issue. >>> >>> Error: >>> ------ >>> test.c: In function 'main': >>> test.c:5:7: internal compiler error: in plus_constant, at explow.c:88 >>> boo (&iarr[1]); >>> ^ >>> >>> Testcase (test.c): >>> ------------------ >>> int iarr[2]; >>> extern int boo(int *); >>> >>> int main(void) { >>> boo (&iarr[1]); >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> Compilation command: >>> -------------------- >>> gcc -c test.c >>> ^ This compiler is built out of revision 187199 (trunk). Error attached >>> above. >>> >>> Configuration: >>> -------------- >>> COLLECT_GCC=.../build-ia64-hp-hpux11.23-trunk/obj_gcc/gcc/xgcc >>> Target: ia64-hp-hpux11.23 >>> Configured with: ...gcc/src/configure --host=ia64-hp-hpux11.23 >>> --build=ia64-hp-hpux11.23 --prefix=.../gcc-ia64-hp-hpux11.23-trunk \ >>> --with-local-prefix=.../gcc-ia64-hp-hpux11.23-trunk --disable-nls \ >>> --with-gmp=.../ia64-hp-hpux11.23 --with-mpfr=.../ia64-hp-hpux11.23 \ >>> --with-mpc=.../ia64-hp-hpux11.23 --with-libelf=.../ia64-hp-hpux11.23 \ >>> --disable-libmudflap --enable-libunwind-exceptions SED=/usr/bin/sed \ >>> --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran >>> Thread model: posix >>> gcc version 4.8.0 20120505 (experimental) (GCC) >>> COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-B' '/.../build-ia64-hp-hpux11.23-trunk/obj_gcc/gcc/' >>> '-c' '-v' >>> GNU C (GCC) version 4.8.0 20120505 (experimental) (ia64-hp-hpux11.23) >>> compiled by GNU C version 4.5.1, GMP version 4.2.4, MPFR version 2.4.1, MPC >>> version 0.8 >>> GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096 >>> >>> Regards, >>> Kannan >>> >> >
