Skip to content

Assertion failed: ((Lower != Upper || (Lower.isMaxValue() || Lower.isMinValue())) && "Lower == Upper, but they aren't min or max value!") #63856

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
dcci opened this issue Jul 14, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Assertion failed: ((Lower != Upper || (Lower.isMaxValue() || Lower.isMinValue())) && "Lower == Upper, but they aren't min or max value!") #63856

dcci opened this issue Jul 14, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
crash Prefer [crash-on-valid] or [crash-on-invalid] llvm:SCEV Scalar Evolution

Comments

@dcci
Copy link
Member

dcci commented Jul 14, 2023 

// $CLANG -Os compressed.cpp
struct info {
  info();
  int length;
};

struct tile {
  void init();
  int num_steps;
  info *step_info;
  float *coefficients, *coefficients_flipped;
};

void tile::init() {
  int i, j;
  new info[num_steps];
  for (i = 0, j = 0; j < num_steps; j++)
    i += step_info[j].length;
  coefficients_flipped = new float[i];
  for (; 0 < num_steps;)
    for (int k = 0;; k++)
      coefficients_flipped[k] = coefficients[-k];
}
@dcci
Copy link
Member Author

dcci commented Jul 14, 2023

Patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D155255

@EugeneZelenko EugeneZelenko added llvm:SCEV Scalar Evolution crash Prefer [crash-on-valid] or [crash-on-invalid] and removed new issue labels Jul 14, 2023
@rgal rgal added this to the LLVM 17.0.X Release milestone Aug 30, 2023
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to Needs Triage in LLVM Release Status Aug 30, 2023
@fhahn fhahn closed this as completed in 0609b65 Sep 4, 2023
@tru tru moved this from Needs Triage to Done in LLVM Release Status Sep 5, 2023
@porglezomp porglezomp mentioned this issue Sep 5, 2023
Closed
@porglezomp
Copy link
Contributor

It looks like this was intended for 17.x but was only merged to main, I opened a backport issue: #65408

llvmbot pushed a commit to llvm/llvm-project-release-prs that referenced this issue Sep 5, 2023
@tejas-amd @llvmbot
[SCEV] Fix potentially empty set for unsigned ranges
b9f0a1d 
The following commit enabled the analysis of ranges for heap allocations:
22ca38d

The range turns out to be empty in cases such as the one in test (which
is [1,1)), leading to an assertion failure. This patch fixes for the
same case.

Fixes llvm/llvm-project#63856

Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D159160

(cherry picked from commit 0609b65aaf03b083d282a4ffe8bf660351dac461)
@EugeneZelenko EugeneZelenko removed this from the LLVM 17.0.X Release milestone Sep 5, 2023
tru pushed a commit to llvm/llvm-project-release-prs that referenced this issue Sep 11, 2023
@tejas-amd @tru
[SCEV] Fix potentially empty set for unsigned ranges
a9f083d 
The following commit enabled the analysis of ranges for heap allocations:
22ca38d

The range turns out to be empty in cases such as the one in test (which
is [1,1)), leading to an assertion failure. This patch fixes for the
same case.

Fixes llvm/llvm-project#63856

Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D159160

(cherry picked from commit 0609b65aaf03b083d282a4ffe8bf660351dac461)
avillega pushed a commit to avillega/llvm-project that referenced this issue Sep 11, 2023
@tejas-amd
[SCEV] Fix potentially empty set for unsigned ranges
0ddf479 
The following commit enabled the analysis of ranges for heap allocations:
22ca38d

The range turns out to be empty in cases such as the one in test (which
is [1,1)), leading to an assertion failure. This patch fixes for the
same case.

Fixes llvm#63856

Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D159160
qihangkong pushed a commit to rvgpu/llvm that referenced this issue Apr 18, 2024
@tejas-amd @ZijunZhaoCCK
[SCEV] Fix potentially empty set for unsigned ranges
89a79f0 
The following commit enabled the analysis of ranges for heap allocations:
22ca38d

The range turns out to be empty in cases such as the one in test (which
is [1,1)), leading to an assertion failure. This patch fixes for the
same case.

Fixes llvm/llvm-project#63856

Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D159160
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
crash Prefer [crash-on-valid] or [crash-on-invalid] llvm:SCEV Scalar Evolution
Projects
LLVM Release Status
Archived in project
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@porglezomp @dcci @rgal @EugeneZelenko