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 D22C73858D1E; Sat,  2 Mar 2024 09:36:34 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D22C73858D1E
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1709372194;
	bh=NXqWKVtLPYKiFYPzul80jBFvH65Pg5x3T19gLVC8Fws=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=hFQBJY19VGW+17Y94OZFGUjJCkmtN3rN4T/l6E/3h7lqk7ZXdciMhNAgypeWgaTXm
	 Cp/fz7k/c7D2SzJUztVqv+sTUCuDdBlZZqBz+FcXC7r4hP9VEJmAZFyj+dbTuVqZdJ
	 AyQUPTUtSvmaWcfa76rrsUIlnWUpdsXTgq+Z2KBc=
From: "congli at smail dot nju.edu.cn" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/114206] recursive function call vs local
 variable addresses
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 09:36:34 +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: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: congli at smail dot nju.edu.cn
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-114206-4-U8pPVDrxm7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114206-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114206-4@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=3D114206

--- Comment #3 from congli <congli at smail dot nju.edu.cn> ---
How about this one: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/Wvhddb7nf?

We ensured the two `b`s are different at each f() call.=