From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 1EAA03858C62; Thu, 9 Feb 2023 18:06:19 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 1EAA03858C62 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1675965979; bh=x7AHF0iiAGrXaeVtDlgALL++tEmAd7hB9hjVHGZBU5k=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=XyY+r9/76PxDnQj+bRF6q9zep30SQSKZGCO4PmyHnyO+Wjp9td4VztdWQhoXtHEgE /Df0XMqIGYz1wD4CvqWXlE2Ju+I2ZwdsCx0f8vqFoANXvCL+mUcykcYT6Ouj01nggw oYWMAsyNFHubFUoHJ3GKrWcMy6OhOSQ+RJLmVUBo= From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug ipa/108740] two identical functions but the code generated differs. Why? Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2023 18:06:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 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: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108740 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Piotr from comment #3) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > > Hmm, ICF + re-inlining makes it ignore some of the pointless volatile d= ance? >=20 > why the code is different abstracting form the sense of the assignment? It is the volatileness of the argument. which by the way for C++20 is deprecated ...=