Assertion `BitWidth == RHS.BitWidth && "Comparison requires equal bit widths"' failed

[llvmbot]

Bugzilla Link	3377
Resolution	FIXED
Resolved on	Mar 12, 2010 00:56
Version	unspecified
OS	Linux
Reporter	LLVM Bugzilla Contributor
CC	@DougGregor

Extended Description

This bug affects r62839. The reduced testcase comes from linux-2.4.37.

$ cat /tmp/bug10.c
typedef unsigned long long u64;

struct tg3_ethtool_stats {
u64 rx_octets;
};

struct {
char string[32];
} ethtool_stats_keys[(sizeof(struct tg3_ethtool_stats)/sizeof(u64))] = {
{ "rx_octets" },
};
$ gcc -c -W -Wall /tmp/bug10.c
$ ~/eclair/eclair/src/parser/dest/bin/clang -w /tmp/bug10.c
clang: /home/roberto/parser/src/include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h:793: bool llvm::APInt::operator==(const llvm::APInt&) const: Assertion `BitWidth == RHS.BitWidth && "Comparison requires equal bit widths"' failed.
0 clang 0x0000000000d87641
1 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c32f90
2 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c32f05 gsignal + 53
3 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c34a73 abort + 387
4 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c2bef9 __assert_fail + 233
5 clang 0x000000000076cda2
6 clang 0x00000000008312f5 clang::InitListChecker::CheckArrayType(clang::InitListExpr*, clang::QualType&, llvm::APSInt, bool, unsigned int&) + 1141
7 clang 0x0000000000830354 clang::InitListChecker::CheckListElementTypes(clang::InitListExpr*, clang::QualType&, bool, unsigned int&) + 852
8 clang 0x0000000000830a1d clang::InitListChecker::CheckExplicitInitList(clang::InitListExpr*, clang::QualType&, unsigned int&) + 93
9 clang 0x0000000000831689 clang::InitListChecker::InitListChecker(clang::Sema*, clang::InitListExpr*, clang::QualType&) + 41
10 clang 0x00000000007f45f5 clang::Sema::CheckInitializerTypes(clang::Expr*&, clang::QualType&, clang::SourceLocation, clang::DeclarationName, bool) + 725
11 clang 0x00000000007f4b7d clang::Sema::AddInitializerToDecl(void*, clang::ASTOwningPtr<&(clang::ActionBase::DeleteExpr(void*))>, bool) + 733
12 clang 0x00000000007f4c06 clang::Sema::AddInitializerToDecl(void*, clang::ASTOwningPtr<&(clang::ActionBase::DeleteExpr(void*))>) + 38
13 clang 0x00000000008c83fd clang::Parser::ParseInitDeclaratorListAfterFirstDeclarator(clang::Declarator&) + 1341
14 clang 0x00000000008c3b8b clang::Parser::ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition(llvm::SmallVector<void*, 4u>) + 1339
15 clang 0x00000000008c3f48 clang::Parser::ParseExternalDeclaration() + 104
16 clang 0x00000000008c4386 clang::Parser::ParseTopLevelDecl(void&) + 22
17 clang 0x00000000007e52db clang::ParseAST(clang::Preprocessor&, clang::ASTConsumer*, bool, bool) + 219
18 clang 0x0000000000589ad4
19 clang 0x000000000058ea29 main + 1417
20 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c1e576 __libc_start_main + 230
21 clang 0x000000000054d3e9
Aborted
$

[lattner]

May only happen with -arch x86_64 ?

[DougGregor]

Also occurs with -arch=pic16:

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20090119/011227.html

[llvmbot]

int a[sizeof(char) / sizeof(char)] = { 1 };

is a simpler test case.

[DougGregor]

Fixed in r62851.

[llvmbot]

Bizarre... a very similar assertion is now violated by the same testcase I submitted for http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3378

Here is what happens with CLANG r62876:

$ cat /tmp/bug11.c
typedef unsigned int brlock_read_lock_t;

enum brlock_indices {
BR_GLOBALIRQ_LOCK,
BR_NETPROTO_LOCK,

__BR_END
};

brlock_read_lock_t
__brlock_array[(4)][(((sizeof(brlock_read_lock_t)__BR_END
+ (1 << ((7)))-1) & ~((1 << ((7)))-1))
/ sizeof(brlock_read_lock_t))] = {
[0 ... (4)-1] = {
[0 ... (((sizeof(brlock_read_lock_t)__BR_END +
(1 << ((7)))-1) & ~((1 << ((7)))-1))
/ sizeof(brlock_read_lock_t))-1] = 0
}
};
$ clang -w /tmp/bug11.c
clang: APInt.cpp:492: bool llvm::APInt::ult(const llvm::APInt&) const: Assertion `BitWidth == RHS.BitWidth && "Bit widths must be same for comparison"' failed.
0 clang 0x0000000000d87a91
1 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c32f90
2 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c32f05 gsignal + 53
3 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c34a73 abort + 387
4 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c2bef9 __assert_fail + 233
5 clang 0x0000000000d5aa80 llvm::APInt::ult(llvm::APInt const&) const + 416
6 clang 0x000000000082f5e5 clang::Sema::ActOnDesignatedInitializer(clang::Designation&, clang::SourceLocation, bool, clang::ASTOwningResult<&(clang::ActionBase::DeleteExpr(void*))>) + 2309
7 clang 0x00000000008dead7 clang::Parser::ParseInitializerWithPotentialDesignator(clang::InitListDesignations&, unsigned int) + 4551
8 clang 0x00000000008df2ae clang::Parser::ParseBraceInitializer() + 702
9 clang 0x00000000008e01f8 clang::Parser::ParseInitializer() + 72
10 clang 0x00000000008dea89 clang::Parser::ParseInitializerWithPotentialDesignator(clang::InitListDesignations&, unsigned int) + 4473
11 clang 0x00000000008df2ae clang::Parser::ParseBraceInitializer() + 702
12 clang 0x00000000008c9048 clang::Parser::ParseInitDeclaratorListAfterFirstDeclarator(clang::Declarator&) + 1368
13 clang 0x00000000008c47bb clang::Parser::ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition(llvm::SmallVector<void*, 4u>) + 1339
14 clang 0x00000000008c4b78 clang::Parser::ParseExternalDeclaration() + 104
15 clang 0x00000000008c4fb6 clang::Parser::ParseTopLevelDecl(void&) + 22
16 clang 0x00000000007e5c4b clang::ParseAST(clang::Preprocessor&, clang::ASTConsumer*, bool, bool) + 219
17 clang 0x0000000000589e84
18 clang 0x000000000058ee39 main + 1417
19 libc.so.6 0x0000003e33c1e576 __libc_start_main + 230
20 clang 0x000000000054d6b9
Aborted
$

Please let me know if you want me to open another bug report.

[DougGregor]

This should (really) be fixed in r62884.