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 E63F33858D33; Mon,  6 Nov 2023 20:37:24 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E63F33858D33
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1699303044;
	bh=vgPpE/g50oNw0/JBrqDDF3gUUQ4sa/mmVWwDICKXlF0=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=JWORb8kbRvmEWsUyUYt4dqP6ZsPYVYc3VZAm6gVEb3Uzp/M8GtrEHn3IZAXOmpW68
	 Pp775hEEu8noDWNOADAPR20ZAiOwrOUDckIdbRFU0/3MD7n9PfZln96yKOwh6NO7X5
	 kKlEFwxelykp6LqrTYPrrSWD2gXwGurjOpxRyTG8=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/111472] [11/12/13/14 Regression] Wrong code
 at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu since r11-4563-gd0d8b5d836
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2023 20:37:24 +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: wrong-code
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: 11.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-111472-4-Jijkr3X2Wg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111472-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111472-4@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=3D111472

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #3)
> I'm not sure that this didn't uncover something elsewhere, possibly ivopts
> since that pass seems to be generating something different and I think th=
ere
> were some fixes put in there on trunk?.
>=20
> Regardless, this currently works on trunk. Can we run a regression on tru=
nk
> and see what patch fixed it?=20

Most likely  r14-4789-g44e7e4498c (aka PR 110243).=