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 B0ED33858C53; Thu,  5 Jan 2023 08:46:59 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B0ED33858C53
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1672908419;
	bh=F5kl3YvAr5+KvJN60S+Xb+tHPeF/1fZ0uD+KQKQSyaw=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=UG8aMppXOfqV2zXtnf76sRKu8hHK/vc9nqdC40BJkF9IDtf0BzvaF81chxHa07E0p
	 lJL688x7XE55/KtpCZr3Y0pNpbT+oL9Nwg+2rXzPO55rB2gfl9IJwYUPMSFcZJTqp6
	 4vTu1xJoly1NgScwBXz/uA7zOaiK1OzUVLiTg6po=
From: "dcb314 at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/108278] [13 Regression] runtime error with -O1 -Wall
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2023 08:46:57 +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-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-108278-4-vwDfT9VtNv@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-108278-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-108278-4@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=3D108278

--- Comment #14 from David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #8)
> I believe the revert in 455acc43518744b89d6a795bbba5045bd228060b should h=
ave
> fixed this?

It looks to me like it does.

> I also brought up the initialization issue on the gcc list:
>=20
> Default initialization of poly-ints
> <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2023-January/240456.html>

This is the second time I have noticed this issue has occurred with a=20
data type in gcc. It would be safer if there was a default initialisation
to zero for all gcc data types.=