public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/112303] [14 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_flow_info failed since r14-3459-g0c78240fd7d519
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 11:08:48 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-112303-4-nPn958YgEb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-112303-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112303
--- Comment #5 from Zhendong Su <zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch> ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> (In reply to Zhendong Su from comment #0)
> > This appears to be a recent regression.
> >
>
> Out of interest, when you say this, do you have a rough range in mind? It'd
> make bisecting easier. Or do you just mean you surely would've hit it by now
> with your testing if it had been there a while?
By "This appears to be a recent regression", I typically mean, according to
Compiler Explorer, the bug is only reproduced with its current trunk build.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-31 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-30 21:52 [Bug tree-optimization/112303] New: ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_flow_info failed zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch
2023-10-30 21:55 ` [Bug tree-optimization/112303] " zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch
2023-10-30 21:59 ` [Bug tree-optimization/112303] [14 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-10-30 22:00 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-10-31 3:21 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-10-31 5:15 ` [Bug tree-optimization/112303] [14 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_flow_info failed since r14-3459-g0c78240fd7d519 sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-10-31 8:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-10-31 11:08 ` zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch [this message]
2023-12-05 22:55 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-05 23:02 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-06 7:35 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2024-03-05 11:19 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-26 10:36 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-26 10:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-26 11:45 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-27 14:35 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-27 17:46 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2024-03-28 14:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-30 3:55 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-04-03 11:59 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-112303-4-nPn958YgEb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).