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 77B07386186C; Fri, 15 Dec 2023 11:28:20 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 77B07386186C
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1702639700;
	bh=Jhz1KLNlD8rpoQSOyOVzI/RgpO/JlJTG2SsUfzRieZM=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=bvA2CZGbPFx1MNMwXm4sF1SgyrX/ydDkdpgv0Y367urjwpBiejTl8fCZ3iQSeIH3y
	 3dYahEMCZH/JtuVpFNdLwSoagU4OrTI897O3u3dzLJUrFVj6tQBnz5s1VEKGVbMVCv
	 aDjKILp4SeupiA7u4VcjlPVTojqw9yr/oLj6GnV8=
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 11:28:20 +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: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
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-zabE1t3yCk@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 #40 from Mathieu Malaterre <malat at debian dot org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #39)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #38)
> > I found this has been marked as resolved but it seems that the patch in
> > comment #34 hasn't been pushed, is it intended? or did I miss something=
 that
> > one commit was pushed but wasn't associated to this PR?
>=20
> Yes, that was intended - the patch is not necessary, there's no bug on the
> TBAA side.  I understand that highway itself is now fine (for whatever
> reason) and
> the reduced testcase invokes undefined behavior.

Could someone confirm that patch in c30 is merged (commit id would be nice!=
),
since it solve the other test case ? Thanks=