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 BAEB73858CDA; Fri,  7 Apr 2023 06:53:42 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BAEB73858CDA
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1680850422;
	bh=zMrdGFMlOSn29S08sT9lrczWgOcX+HdciZgcyeejL0M=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=RFFuzyeFr2gdc5ikRbf4ouHwcns72j6BUWlIVgcV9dMfYET23YnjKvWzON3hWDCRG
	 BQpCREHDIaVIahYbf8vGyCLhRhDGGWkPbDDRpMqUJig7NLkC7OQK+xhoL0sTupB8Zb
	 njBCWDDCDAV4SJf4+cmp9PrRTPl3DhycpvkntPGY=
From: "xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/109443] missed optimization of std::vector
 access (Related to issue 35269)
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2023 06:53:42 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: xry111 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: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-109443-4-JQ6N8CiSJX@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109443-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109443-4@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=3D109443

Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |UNCONFIRMED
         Resolution|INVALID                     |---

--- Comment #3 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #2)
> Does not Richard's response still apply here?
>=20
> > Sorry, but the vector v is potentially clobbered by the call to f, so t=
he load
> > of the array pointer you index into with i is not loop invariant.

Alright it does not apply.  I was blind...=