RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1960701 - Wrong-code regression starting with gcc 8.2
Summary: Wrong-code regression starting with gcc 8.2
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
Classification: Red Hat
Component: gcc
Version: 8.6
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: beta
: ---
Assignee: Marek Polacek
QA Contact: Václav Kadlčík
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2021-05-14 15:53 UTC by Jakub Jelinek
Modified: 2023-07-18 14:19 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version: gcc-8.5.0-2.el8
Doc Type: No Doc Update
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-11-09 19:35:43 UTC
Type: Bug
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2021:4386 0 None None None 2021-11-09 19:35:57 UTC

Description Jakub Jelinek 2021-05-14 15:53:06 UTC
As mentioned in https://gcc.gnu.org/PR95226 , gcc 8.2 regressed from 8.1 on the
#include <vector>

struct T {
  unsigned a;
  float b {8.};
};

int main()
{
  T t = {1};
  std::vector<T> tt = {{1}, {2}};
  if (t.a != 1 || t.b != 8.0f || tt[0].a != 1 || tt[0].b != 8.0f || tt[1].a != 2 || tt[1].b != 8.0f)
    __builtin_abort ();
}

testcase (even without optimizations).

Comment 1 Jakub Jelinek 2021-05-14 15:54:22 UTC
This worked fine in gcc <= 7.x, 8.1 and works fine in 9.1 and later too.

Comment 2 Marek Polacek 2021-05-27 21:05:26 UTC
I've investigated this a bit.  The wrong-code started with
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git&a=commit;h=bdc2c1ea35c16d3bbd3711430d8035dd54cfcf20
which is a different change than what was committed to (then) trunk:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git&a=commit;h=5603790dbf233c31c60d8877f632c06c4753acfb

I think we should back out the first (fcl_c99) change, add the test in #c0, and then
1) remove array-temp1.C, or
2) apply the second (TREE_READONLY) patch and keep array-temp1.C.

I think trading a wrong-code fix for a missed-optimization fix is a good deal.

I've tested both 1) and 2).  Jason/Jakub, any preference?

2) seems to be in the current trunk still, so is probably fairly safe.

Comment 7 errata-xmlrpc 2021-11-09 19:35:43 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (Low: gcc security and bug fix update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2021:4386


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.