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 79D763858D35; Thu,  1 Dec 2022 19:54:18 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 79D763858D35
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1669924458;
	bh=eAojZi4ZfLBlTgAC2Ns7Ei4BB8DTFdLz/V1KPhSyBFc=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=T7gliP5kf+eK51ROlzZntv31oWQSLIwB751T5iTyB8Nsu+LSC+WolCvsCwM+/TGZy
	 M7Mu8G0JLzMaDaXXdKCyc/IgGhjfj0MLOVpVLro/yB/FTFgo4bzCKVBXGI/YSYzc7d
	 nxFlbhSz1D9bTqyxRfcZwpCEHxIeVWYFuutAZ1xE=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107833] [12/13 Regression] wrong code at -Os
 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-5138-ge82c382971664d6f
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2022 19:54:18 +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: 12.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia 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: 12.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: see_also
Message-ID: <bug-107833-4-vzJ5XNfALq@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107833-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107833-4@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=3D107833

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           See Also|                            |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
                   |                            |a/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100810

--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Wasn't this discussed in the past in other PRs?  Whether uninitialized va=
rs
> mean anything or anything but same value each time a SSA_NAME initialized=
 to
> it is used?

I think you are talking about PR 100810 and the discussions around the patch
that fixed that.=