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 9245D385840D; Sat,  5 Nov 2022 10:49:59 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9245D385840D
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1667645399;
	bh=Wk4U54CF8o6phKkisKzJ6EFyJcc7I8i7XVUYO6SNAcc=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=puSAcaJvGuXtRMNz7qBc2XzbYI1UCWwmAVaxWF9zd4st2XOk3g93+5mj0IrHcSGYU
	 ORDkNhcroBR/lNUT4qrobDBpnY+US9c7SW+8+635OtjC89PztmepXfztupncfJOoOU
	 GtKcHIhWi37+rjvCPTp/j2cVrIA7aEeqJScAKUA4=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107505] [13 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info
 failed (error: returns_twice call is not first in basic block 2)
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2022 10:49:58 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-checking, ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: everconfirmed cf_reconfirmed_on bug_status
Message-ID: <bug-107505-4-766FV1R95T@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107505-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107505-4@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=3D107505

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2022-11-05
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
That looks about correct - patch is OK if testing succeeds.=