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 588D93858C66; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:25:45 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 588D93858C66
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1707758745;
	bh=ATflmrbG1FZB7I4trxgjSE0vNldWkcWd0kXY13SIT/U=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=jqpBiv2QsWmqRe6x82cRdtAzC+hqPaWdJoZR7YYGh5ayfCMge56XGgI7dVlG18671
	 q5JrKLZOLf9FsjxVtryzRebqcJQOi+21Phj8YkQGcnRUQEmdbz1hp0waXRmfixM2lW
	 FgsgHI+oOVburJ+XLis2cQ8/juiLXdGHPxPkUM8o=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/113712] [11/12/13/14 Regression] lto crash: when building
 641.leela_s peek with Example-gcc-linux-x86.cfg (SPEC2017 1.1.9) since
 r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:25:44 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113712-4-xsY26zeEYV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113712-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113712-4@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=3D113712

--- Comment #19 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #18)
> (In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #17)
> > I've bisected this (using the test from Andrew Pinski) to
> > r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797
>=20
> That's a coincidence, with -fno-ipa-sra the testcase fails even earlier,
> IPA-SRA was just hiding it, most probably by localizing some symbol before
> the linking stage.
>=20
> Bugs that are only reproducible with -fno-use-linker-plugin are unlikely =
to
> get a high priority.  But I understand that the original issue does not n=
eed
> it?

I am not 100% sure if the original reported issue had been using the LTO pl=
ugin
because I could not reproduce it when using the plugin.=20

>=20
> (Also, the issue is supposed to be reproducible ton x86_64-linux, right?)

Yes it is supposed to be reproducible on x86_64; I reduced it there.=