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 52A1B38582A3; Fri, 31 Mar 2023 14:59:09 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 52A1B38582A3
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1680274749;
	bh=usLC/w7aKyXyhWi9NmmK0wnZQ0/gCbKMqngBrcTup6U=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=R21lrL2BF3vNcFL5T0ER234Rm0JawjEzNKMl8RsTTguG/jWZjpdeDBETRwuIBpaJP
	 sh3UHATPJXaRCX+YOvvcwOLXNi+7Ob4Riw4kdQXBvZzPd/zg23cWtyKvME2BKK045U
	 u8f2vsWGXm9pgUFWPLRL/NeNjeMZPVjsP2Yiz3dg=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/109093] [13 regression] csmith: a February runtime bug ?
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 14:59:08 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
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-109093-4-Uc4zFaZ0nb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109093-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109093-4@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=3D109093

--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It is true that with r13-6661 + r13-6691 this bug is just latent, so perhap=
s it
doesn't need to be P1 unless somebody comes up with a reproducer.=