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 59790384F4A0; Fri, 15 Dec 2023 07:32:33 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 59790384F4A0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1702625553;
	bh=R8QmA1XbyhndLFVaJAFRTVPbUC+OdaYXj3j3wK6RzKE=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=pF59DiFF+IeIeIVHmZ4u5Bw6gggVozwFCgaIT4hMOfVLMeI5RT2K1dVmvvb8m6Hdz
	 MknFZJHGoJeprn6VF4LeCUm3gycjSuqFwHn3xV2BjEQVo3GR94k0wdCPEYSTB1QVLf
	 7ZtCPubsxqA0WzPR2eqvoasbhlX4nqShhJE5hbeA=
From: "malat at debian dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/111591] ppc64be: miscompilation with -mstrict-align /
 -O3
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 07:32:31 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: needs-bisection
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: malat at debian dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-111591-4-tObdZLaZTP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111591-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111591-4@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=3D111591

--- Comment #36 from Mathieu Malaterre <malat at debian dot org> ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #32)
[...]
> So IMHO #c1 test case is problematic, hi @Mathieu, could you have a double
> check?

I vaguely recall crafting this test-case with cvise with gcc-13. This is wh=
y it
is using some kind of gcc-13 specific `__remove_reference`. I cannot verify=
 the
code using clang because of this. I also do not see anything wrong under
valgrind.

If the other test-case(s) (also cvise-reduced) is/are now working I would s=
ay
let's close this one as fixed and if it re-appear in the original highway
source code, I'll re-run yet another cvise reduction.

Thanks everyone for your work ! Very much appreciated.=