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 96A873852C5A; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 20:01:40 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 96A873852C5A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1668715300;
	bh=nAH6hkGjzxbi46hqxCHyXl6XZMQ94D18Y5xib1PQrkA=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=EAInFxMKbG1WdRO587N8wVZWeN2ez6qdkYxGGDliMSufP31AUDehQTFE3NKDiNegp
	 ZTYAx1nEtuAmpn+HmrzDJfHnyHeuBcTajxla9HlJhn8aEQLiO2lFc0NNNA/6V9UGjX
	 fzTJxjkuL9Zk0JGy7AomRI7xh5oGT/kskyYjOlPE=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/107734] [13 Regression] valgrind error for
 gcc/testsuite/cc.target/i386/pr46051.c
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 20:01:40 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-checking, ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107734-4-KkbMZRVU4c@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107734-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107734-4@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=3D107734

--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #10)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> > Fixed.
>=20
> Thanks for that.=20
>=20
> Would it ok to manually check all uses of sbitmap, to make sure they
> initialise bits appropriately, or would it be better to define a construc=
tor
> which sets=20
> the internal bitmap data to something sensible ?

I suspect most are done correctly either having bitmap_clear or bitmap_ones
right after the creation of the sbitmap (I looked at a few when I was writi=
ng
this patch).
Someone could go and audit all of them but I am working on other things at =
this
point really.=