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 66D213858C35; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 12:27:09 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 66D213858C35
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1701088029;
	bh=lMSOa+GwsJSC28K1TcNXBUQN7W1cR+IPLzm35Z5kpwU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=fodusD2k7fWlZ4qf1vX0VhMoXzZjXR7VGZuTKh5ontUfCGyV1DfC+nw1/iMi/eBkS
	 ljNTs7oySi7jiILSGJloJ6vaituPR4G7av7DRK83jYAw+RXUbtfW2sUT8urnadhVpI
	 f9FEaflpxxDsPMnvvt4EA04vQ4nJM+3yGCFB3A1Y=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/111601] [14 Regression] profilebootstrap fails in
 stagestrain in libcody on x86_64-linux-gnu and powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 12:27:08 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build, ice-on-valid-code, needs-bisection
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub 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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-111601-4-5cGWizPc24@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111601-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111601-4@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=3D111601

--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #12)
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2023, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>=20
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111601
> >=20
> > --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > r14-4662 still builds ok and r14-4668 fails, wonder which of those comm=
its it
> > is.
>=20
> My bet is r14-4664-g04c9cf5c786b94

That is my guess as well, but because the new pass is enabled at -O2 and ab=
ove
only and stage1 is built with -O0, it wouldn't then be related to jump
threading but this new RTL optimization.
Anyway, once my current r14-4665 build finishes or fails, I'll try to rebui=
ld
cp/call.o with -fno-fold-mem-offsets and see what I get to.=