From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 3B5603858D32; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 10:27:14 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3B5603858D32
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1666002434;
	bh=yriX6sPe3lKsfL8JPezEFhCseRSwgwrSpYT7wnRCl9c=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=aemccrXF09w86PKAz4Ui8PAWE7mznyLUqnci0NPhwvkMgLqwPkM/aX7iJJBDDgtA7
	 f2jxOpZPVVb18jHO6rPzBj8YTkt1mRhvzlhaz7A3U9SwIkU4RrObdoHDhJtw7cZhjy
	 XPrTU1QRh09HlcqZWr1pftn/ObOVnkDg5eoxInSI=
From: "shaohua.li at inf dot ethz.ch" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/107257] Wrong code at -O2 on x86_64-linux-gnu
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 10:27:13 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: needs-bisection
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: shaohua.li at inf dot ethz.ch
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: resolution bug_status
Message-ID: <bug-107257-4-XK2A12zrmC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107257-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107257-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107257

Li Shaohua <shaohua.li at inf dot ethz.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|INVALID                     |---
             Status|RESOLVED                    |NEW

--- Comment #4 from Li Shaohua <shaohua.li at inf dot ethz.ch> ---
Hi,
 Sorry for my previous over-reduced test case. Here is a well-formed reduct=
ion:
```
void printf();
int a, b, c;
int d[3];
int e(int f, int g, int k, int l, int m, int n) {
  int h =3D 4 * f + 2 * (g + l + n) + k + m, j =3D h >> 4;
  return j;
}
void o(int f) {
  int i =3D 0;
  for (; i < 3; i++)
    d[i] =3D 4279432140;
  for (; - 72 + f - -72 <=3D 2; f++) {
    a =3D 2;
    for (; a >=3D 0; a--) {
      b =3D 2;
      for (; b >=3D 0; b--) {
        int p =3D !(d[b] > 0 !=3D e(10, 29, 42, 74, 89, -68) + f - 15);
        if (p)
          break;
      }
      if (f)
        break;
    }
  }
}
void q() {
  int i =3D 0;
  o(0);
  if (c)
    for (; i < 1;)
      for (; i < 1; i++)
        ;
}
int main() {
  q();
  printf("%d\n", b);
}


```

Compiler explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/bjjW5q17r=