From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 232CC3857735; Thu, 8 Jun 2023 18:46:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 232CC3857735 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1686249994; bh=rOdnONH0I/50rCrZHB0JB6JECzwbuteRNZYjgSfGj3U=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=HLkwX5Cd6mv9s5l9MQtH4ySFvBSUynbQiCymY/TG99fuD+qn042p39aGZw4KGvt+B Kd1Q7vLy8Q4HlNg7glyREmSYZN+nGdxuszYW6y/BLXBRJcMwZD65bRprROa/Xw4lm6 STc2x6gVjEMg+UWJj7+FMhqFuMj3ic/NNICiBtYk= From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/110173] [13/14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination when using __builtin_unreachable Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2023 18:46:34 +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: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.2 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: short_desc everconfirmed bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on target_milestone 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=3D110173 Andrew Pinski changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Missed Dead Code |[13/14 Regression] Missed |Elimination when using |Dead Code Elimination when |__builtin_unreachable since |using __builtin_unreachable |r14-569-g21e2ef2dc25 | Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2023-06-08 Target Milestone|--- |13.2 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- s/j();/j(0);/ Actually worked in GCC 12.3.0 but failed in GCC 13.1.0 so that is a regress= ion there. But definitely unrelated to that GCC 14 change.=