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 59EDB3858D37; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 19:35:48 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 59EDB3858D37
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1688067348;
	bh=eJan2QsDCkmRLo9MH6svW6q90vdgwVSE1BkWvCr9DgQ=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=FcrLXNzYZhUCobTolhApuC0LlRilE5ZejdUMhaOSkBwdp9zadS14Oq3vDLC3pbTc9
	 IaoZgza17nKpgXs15RLtiI/lOXTx50oXiSJ7TcPOlVvHIfCMjmNu9wr1c4eH4v7VMD
	 rR1qAa4ouOlZWPKm64EXV2o5WG/zpErHH05wwQVs=
From: "juergen.reuter at desy dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/110311] [14 Regression] regression in
 tree-optimizer
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 19:35:48 +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: juergen.reuter at desy dot de
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: <bug-110311-4-GoqIAShP4Y@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-110311-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-110311-4@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=3D110311

--- Comment #29 from J=C3=BCrgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #28)
> Update: recompiling that file with 13-branch fails for me, too.
> Playing with the one-line patch for pr86277 makes no difference, fortunat=
ely.
>=20
> Compiling the file with gfortran-12 seems to work ok.
>=20
> So is this really a 14-only regression, or is 13-branch already suspiciou=
s?

We have gcc 13.1 in our CI, everything works fine there. I am still working=
 on
a smaller test, but have very bad connection rn.=