From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 5FCED385840A; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 19:33:56 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5FCED385840A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1688067236; bh=UW3ZVazH3XM0y6ZRrUH7VgBvytxdiI2T6W6S1WJAwQA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=TJ8efpFlfk5dN2JLO0J2dWbl1onvbb5ElKpN8TRAMY2/jjwBZEgUVdqr7utEev9eG RsvC0WRsNfljLCB6JoBn+ZMq7JylgarkMu4fChSEAwjPBnqigpdaIOEGn4YmgeGiRg 3a4lVWa1sNO86YqhwcWCHS2+GTkg3+q/crCPwv80= From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/110311] [14 Regression] regression in tree-optimizer Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 19:33:56 +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: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf 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: 14.0 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=3D110311 --- Comment #28 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Update: recompiling that file with 13-branch fails for me, too. Playing with the one-line patch for pr86277 makes no difference, fortunatel= y. Compiling the file with gfortran-12 seems to work ok. So is this really a 14-only regression, or is 13-branch already suspicious?=