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 ED51A3858CDB; Mon,  9 Jan 2023 13:53:31 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org ED51A3858CDB
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1673272411;
	bh=hbgJpdLyQ4KCTQVnkKRLxmu4F7OEvimoRaliPG2ZCZU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=UglJN4cnbM7L91RFCI1ERe832Wxa5NPf3dZY14M9AX2Gju2A6KklwVjdQD9a0j/e7
	 Y5PUN/LSqe9mDY6I6Nd1OsPnvMGfN5Ky0XeaOtvGCbHxUH+83LxH8Ro8DtFNiPfhh3
	 EfBGLM6qnTOvh87CNIoQe7h/mr4Nmfowd3YpoOf8=
From: "segher at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/108298] Wrong optimization of volatile access from
 gcc 11 and beyond
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2023 13:53:31 +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: 12.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: segher at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: DUPLICATE
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-108298-4-bp7DaeqKgv@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-108298-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-108298-4@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=3D108298

--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It cannot be a duplicate: this bug was introduced much later than when
PR69482 was filed!

But glad the same patch seems to have fixed both, sure :-)=