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 558063858283; Wed,  7 Feb 2024 10:00:56 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 558063858283
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1707300056;
	bh=h3NGrQLuWJ5bra5JXDMnOMfblu9sbEwyhv0+Teau6MU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=tmt/rXsdAbdU6xjKoKD2APGLVY10WuoS9jvRFac0PXOSYDCDezlnxJIS0EPnK12SK
	 pLmpOvQnPNrVK1WQCApdeown4Kpkf0Y5qEUMD5SG6hBftNTZMAqPR3PVzDOcGTLU3X
	 ZXySIjUfp2oHsd6tPzikN7iBhi8d9v6MEVRzWhTU=
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/113731] [14 regression] ICE when building
 libbsd since r14-8768-g85094e2aa6dba7
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2024 10:00:55 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113731-4-12vvVwoThr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113731-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113731-4@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=3D113731

--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #9)
> (In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #8)
> > the proposed patch doesn't fix the amdgcn-amdhsa bootstrap.
>=20
> So what is the error with the patch? The output can't be the same as the
> function was removed.

For what it is worth, Jakub's patch (based on Tamar's patch email ),
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/645062.html ,
works here, i.e. I can build GCC with the current in-tree newlib.=