https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120654
Bug ID: 120654
Summary: Crash at -O3: during GIMPLE pass: ivopts
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120277
Bug ID: 120277
Summary: Crash at -O2: in upper_bound, at value-range.h:1181
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120211
Yunbo Ni changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yunboni at smail dot nju.edu.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119450
Bug ID: 119450
Summary: Crash at -O3: during RTL pass: peephole2
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119071
Bug ID: 119071
Summary: Miscompile at -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119053
--- Comment #2 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Dup. The only difference between this and PR 118922 is the variable names
> and the offset is slightly different.
>
> Since this is the third issue you filed for th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119053
Bug ID: 119053
Summary: Miscompile at -O2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118963
Bug ID: 118963
Summary: Miscompile at -O2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118954
Bug ID: 118954
Summary: Miscompile at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118953
--- Comment #2 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> I get '45' at -O2 and -O3 locally and on godbolt, but -O1 shows 0.
Yes, you're right. I mistakenly wrote the result from the case before it was
reduced. Sorry about that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118953
Bug ID: 118953
Summary: Miscompile at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118922
--- Comment #2 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> (In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #0)
> > This code triggers SIGKILL at -O2/3
>
> Note that what you really mean here is "it times out", and godbolt just
> sends SIGKI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118918
--- Comment #3 from Yunbo Ni ---
Thanks for the explanation. I'll pay attention to this in the future.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118922
Bug ID: 118922
Summary: Miscompile at -O2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118918
Bug ID: 118918
Summary: Miscompile at -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118915
Bug ID: 118915
Summary: Miscompile at -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118895
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
The function name should be `b`, to be consistent with the backtrace. Apologies
for the oversight.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118895
Bug ID: 118895
Summary: ICE: during GIMPLE pass: pre
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118061
Yunbo Ni changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yunboni at smail dot nju.edu.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118644
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
Bisected to
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/3f05d70389f523cf53f9b8fdf56570e8a6ecdb8b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118644
Yunbo Ni changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118643
--- Comment #2 from Yunbo Ni ---
Bisected to
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/3f05d70389f523cf53f9b8fdf56570e8a6ecdb8b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118643
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
*** Bug 118644 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118644
Bug ID: 118644
Summary: Crash at -O3 during RTL pass: expand
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118643
Bug ID: 118643
Summary: Crash at -O3 during RTL pass: expand
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118638
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #0)
> This code prints -1 at -O0/1/2/3 and 3 at -Os:
>
> ```c
> int printf(const char *, ...);
> int a;
> int b(int f) {
> int c = f ? 1 : 0, d = f ? 1 : 0, e = f ? 1 : 0;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118638
Bug ID: 118638
Summary: Miscompile with -Os and -O0/1/2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118623
Bug ID: 118623
Summary: Miscompile with -O2/3 and -O0/1
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118344
Bug ID: 118344
Summary: Crash at -O3: internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118148
Bug ID: 118148
Summary: Miscompilation at -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118064
Bug ID: 118064
Summary: Miscompilation at -O1
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117841
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
Bisected to
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=6bf66276e3e41d5d92f7b7260e98b6a111653805
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117841
Bug ID: 117841
Summary: Miscompile with -O3 and -O0/1/2
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117723
Bug ID: 117723
Summary: Miscompile with -O1 and -O0/2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117574
Bug ID: 117574
Summary: Miscompile with -O2/3 and -O0/1
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117549
Bug ID: 117549
Summary: Miscompile with -O0 and -O1/2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 6.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117543
--- Comment #2 from Yunbo Ni ---
After reviewing the commit, I realized it's a duplicate of bug 117476. The
mistake was due to using the wrong commit in the bisect process. I’ll be more
careful with this next time. Apologies for the oversight.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117543
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
Sorry I just found I reverted to the wrong commit. I would check it right now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117543
Yunbo Ni changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117476
--- Comment #26 from Yunbo Ni ---
*** Bug 117543 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117543
Bug ID: 117543
Summary: Miscompile with -O1 and -O0/2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117532
--- Comment #6 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #5)
> Given the # of dupes, I recommend that fuzzers revert that commit locally
> for now.
Thanks for your advice. I'll revert it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117532
Bug ID: 117532
Summary: Miscompile with -Os and -O0/1/2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117531
Bug ID: 117531
Summary: Miscompile with -O2 and -O0/1/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117528
Bug ID: 117528
Summary: Miscompile with -O1 and -O0/2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117522
Bug ID: 117522
Summary: Miscompile with -O3 and -O0/1/2
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117498
Bug ID: 117498
Summary: Miscompile with -O3 and -O0/1/2
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117453
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
I'm not sure if it is a duplicate case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117453
Bug ID: 117453
Summary: Miscompile with -O3 and -O0/1/2
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117451
Bug ID: 117451
Summary: Miscompile with -00/1/2 and -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117427
Bug ID: 117427
Summary: internal compiler error: verify_gimple failed with
O2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117426
Bug ID: 117426
Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425
--- Comment #6 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> A good resource for sequence points is https://c-faq.com/expr/seqpoints.html
> .
Thanks for your detailed explanation! I'll check it out.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425
--- Comment #2 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> (In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #0)
> > The version is gcc 4.7.3.
>
> When you say this, do you mean that is the first version you saw it on?
Sorry for the misunders
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425
Bug ID: 117425
Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424
Bug ID: 117424
Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117367
--- Comment #6 from Yunbo Ni ---
I apologize for the trouble I’ve caused due to my lack of understanding. I’ll
keep this red line in mind moving forward.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117368
Bug ID: 117368
Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117367
Bug ID: 117367
Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116811
Bug ID: 116811
Summary: internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116764
Bug ID: 116764
Summary: SIGSEGV in C
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
--- Comment #6 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> (In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #4)
> > Thanks for your kind and detailed explanation! BTW, when I change the value
> > of b to 1 in line 3 and compiled this code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
--- Comment #4 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Note in C++, it is undefined at the point of return in a rather than
> afterwards.
>
> Also note PR 104690 is filed about catching this with -fsanitize=undefined.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #0)
> Created attachment 59101 [details]
> The preprocessed file when using -O2
>
> When I compiled this code with -O0 and -O2 flags, its outputs were different:
>
> ```c
> #i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
Bug ID: 116690
Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116647
Bug ID: 116647
Summary: Internal compiler error in operator[], at vec.h:910
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116487
Bug ID: 116487
Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
67 matches
Mail list logo
