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 AE967385828E; Fri,  6 Oct 2023 16:26:53 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AE967385828E
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1696609613;
	bh=Zci9WOTe1eJCXh0mHeZJ49gygXt2qjCrYiC48YC/SaU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=EiybAUm8u4ucT3/zMsAIEz4NBzWPH9QTB2bj+VwLwel+oBL6dcgzzPgkvPIT3CZ8n
	 OI9a3maO3sUFOsiS7HnwXQswY8nAOxrOIS2f+1cXUSbtLb5feQHRUoMYI33S8v/uA+
	 4u3v/LeI/KA4foxrRVTMQZl8ZG1W43RHeoGBtO70=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/111714] Strange behavior when casting
 std::size_t to bool, UB or compiler bug?
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2023 16:26:53 +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: 9.4.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: keywords
Message-ID: <bug-111714-4-BiWZ0WBO9b@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111714-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111714-4@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=3D111714

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |wrong-code

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Carlos Galvez from comment #3)
> Thanks for the quick response! Unfortunately we are stuck on GCC 9 for
> reasons so I'll try to shuffle the code around a bit to make it work :)

Using -fno-ivopts is another options since that is where the bad code is
introduced.=