From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id C997B385703C; Tue, 15 Aug 2023 13:39:08 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C997B385703C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1692106748; bh=mvIN0eR9juSU8bO5krsPrLdjpgK9Wz4aAdeDkQA5A2o=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=OEtsyYjyDCGaIeQusq3cbStjAWmqx2TFT2Wkux8I9tMi1Ya9/CsI96OfXUbrzM1iF pOTeM/uB33tZcL5N7EmsmOBgOUhxAXKXeKq4b5so5Ivz9Ehzl9GGHYd5iCNqhcl2W+ aqnMdU7rWpxnDMeesWVTmopj2olaUI0n1IcxON3k= From: "rguenther at suse dot de" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/111019] [12/13/14 Regression] Optimizer incorrectly assumes variable is not changed while change happens through another pointer Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2023 13:39:08 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: alias, wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de 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: 12.4 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=3D111019 --- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111019 >=20 > Patrick Palka changed: >=20 > What |Removed |Added > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > CC| |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org > Keywords|needs-bisection | >=20 > --- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka --- > Bisection points to r12-4319-g09a0affdb0598a Huh, that should make us optimize less ... (it was also backported to GCC 11). Having a good/bad rev should make it easier to analyze though - thanks.=