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 4016F384DEFD; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 14:45:20 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4016F384DEFD
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1708008320;
	bh=gPlH6TgrwQ6p5X3uwQJtAomU7UMB2GmRRQ3kb6v4ghk=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=gh8gmjL3vKcaDKqbHq4gxRSQt4X6WPDjcrIG9ygQ8FYdXiiHj1nebhHnlKehzX0q1
	 3taf1B09LCH7vfepZAglIbOeJ7EaDD2gkC5xQfiBa5FjHYWBilBRie81EhVWBvXh0L
	 loOBYdG8bISmwwKZNhJYVJQBXe6XmzTx8dF5YWGg=
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/113907] [14 regression] ICU miscompiled since on x86
 since r14-5109-ga291237b628f41
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 14:45:19 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113907-4-CglHKCKYn1@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113907-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113907-4@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=3D113907

--- Comment #35 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D113907
>=20
> --- Comment #34 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> =
---
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>=20
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D113907
> >=20
> > --- Comment #32 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #31)
> [...]
> > > Not streaming value ranges is an omission on my side (I mistakely ass=
umed we
> > > do stream them).  We ought to stream them, since otherwise we will lo=
se
> > > propagated return value ranges in partitioned programs, which is pity.
> >=20
> > Not sure if it is a good idea to start streaming them now in stage4, bu=
t sure,
>=20
> Please don't do that now ;)
>=20
> (we've not had ranges early originally, and even nonzero bits were not
> computed)
>=20
> But yes, IPA CP jump functions with value-ranges might be a problem.
> I think it does instantiate them as local ranges, does it?  We
> have streaming support for ranges, we just don't stream the auxiliary
> data for all SSA names (like also not points-to info).

Also remember we like to have a fix that's easily backportable, and
that's probably going to be resetting the info.  We can do something
more fancy for GCC 15=