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 DFC90385840E; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 13:29:00 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org DFC90385840E
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1679491740;
	bh=zpjkg7OgU2yQznY6b8KArZOTg22zdbWk0HKKx3fryJA=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=FBLV0k11rjov8E+CjuAKa8PABfHL39yyxnZP/ZkUpeUB3A19Zxe6vpx48xtsee46k
	 Xfiw8nvayv7uvCQjCTdB6k68Ihvz+rcxdvBHsruVEG9P1U2lOOnOR8EnaNSdWdeC6V
	 wAShIOdPnYWB3bhp+MBZCgmk/sYVCzUs3RvF9qEU=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug d/109231] [13 regression] Comparison failure in
 libphobos/libdruntime/rt/util/typeinfo.o
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 13:29:00 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: d
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-109231-4-RQTJWuDPBd@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109231-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109231-4@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=3D109231

--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #8)
> Sure.  Even compressed with xz, the tarballs are too large for bugzilla,
> so I've placed them at
>=20
> 	https://www.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de/~ro/files/ti.s2.tar.xz
> 	https://www.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de/~ro/files/ti.s3.tar.xz
>=20
> > Also, check if you are using the same d21 binary, another possibility m=
ight be
> > miscompiled d21.
>=20
> Both the dumps and the objects/assembler output were created with the
> same d21 binary, just the -fno-checking/-fchecking=3D1 difference.

But the typeinfo.s is the same in both tarballs, optimized dump too, and wh=
ile
some
RTL dumps differ slightly in used addresses, I see no code changes in those
either.=