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 353993858D3C; Wed, 21 Jun 2023 23:37:42 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 353993858D3C
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1687390662;
	bh=5UYrCF8jk0sLtMfTLZxTBz1rxqsjUhY7xWSOp3w29DQ=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=GIy0gvwdt4AqvMj1U8+QkVOEOfCk99Yqi+w2MO5CG7ug9YStfWEqd9wZ0y3K9oqvu
	 JwamcTDsbpbP1NvIgZBIXQ7HLbR6r2AyEyzBWPitY24tBnloHkoIKstvd5ysJkO5kk
	 /COOZLsomzLpY5zTqGVbBUX/DuDV3tawsrAxRM+s=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/110311] [14 Regression] gfortran 14.0 regression
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 23:37:41 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia 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: <bug-110311-4-tWZXETNhPy@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 #8 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to J=C3=BCrgen Reuter from comment #7)
> The problem seems really connected to optimization, if I compile our code
> with -g -O0 or -g -O1, everything works ok. Next, I will try to check why=
 it
> is actually failing (my guess, unconfirmed yet, is that some data structu=
res
> are optimized away such that the program runs then on inconsistent data).
> Then I will check that specific commit. We are sure that it was introduced
> within this time frame, because we have a weekly CI that clones gcc, and
> then builds and runs our code and testsuite. That was working on the morn=
ing
> of June 12, but failed on the morning of June 19.

Do you know if -fno-tree-vectorizer causes the issue to go away?=