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 79C9A3857BBC; Thu, 16 Nov 2023 12:00:25 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 79C9A3857BBC
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1700136025;
	bh=V8QM4LbjLzINkGeM1+Nk29EOdWNd/sIjDsdqZs8lhyY=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=VUG1JqSZK/W8f75vvwWI9uUsmLmYeNMHDkV3yahfpYGZIkPTXk9XUaAqecTErVqlt
	 KPHCxCnF6VYepq4oe7n/hGgwRDIvEet/fynMlFN0v6OFEc97y5KhHWLfjOsG3Ivva/
	 GVcgtFZ6nMFVVfJSXYXGlJNb4Xs6M077MVAKP9+U=
From: "iamanonymous.cs at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/112565] Abnormal Jump in Execution using 'stepi' Command
 in GDB under O2 optimization
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 12:00:25 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: iamanonymous.cs at gmail dot com
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-112565-4-a2GcAb6VUy@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-112565-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-112565-4@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=3D112565

--- Comment #2 from Anonymous <iamanonymous.cs at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1)
> (In reply to Anonymous from comment #0)
> > Tom de Vries suggests that this issue may be attributed to a GCC
> > optimization bug.
>=20
> I do not.

Thanks for the correction. I apologize for the misunderstanding. I didn't
notice that you mentioned this behavior was expected.=