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 97F0D3858D33; Thu,  4 Jan 2024 17:57:20 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 97F0D3858D33
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1704391040;
	bh=7jcQ0NF7cDFnSPKSiAHG3zaU1oUDSf9xSwPldvVLeZo=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=oii4BeMpuMmwzQ1MLheaSwGsd4xt5f/pMoyZtMK+J7t5Cb1lpDDAFmxLUizc9+uh0
	 FjAeq5mY3EbOGnPiyFwNjZ9uk60Ek5RpvAobn+sjYLoh957EwWCkUH8uOMys1DRKKx
	 RSl9WbPM/Zk4i0wefgBC8eF9sd6kXSA2MhVIe7Zo=
From: "hp at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/113226] [14 Regression]
 testsuite/std/ranges/iota/max_size_type.cc fails for cris-elf after
 r14-6888-ga138b99646a555
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2024 17:57:20 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: hp 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: 
Message-ID: <bug-113226-4-8N8i6IFGRO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113226-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113226-4@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=3D113226

--- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #1)
> Huh, how bizarre.

Indeed.  I'm *not* ruling out an actual gcc bug.  Whether in the target or
middle-end this time I dare not guess; too few posts.

JFTR; I already mentioned this in the gcc-patches post: I see only posts on
gcc-testresults@ that include r14-6888-ga138b99646a555 for 64-bit-targets w=
ith
"-m32" multilibs, and I don't trust them to treat that hw_type the same.=