From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30584 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2015 12:21:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30544 invoked by uid 48); 22 Feb 2015 12:21:43 -0000 From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/30957] Misscompare with variable expansion optimization Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 13:02:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: vries at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING 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: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg02420.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30957 --- Comment #23 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- I've made the test-case pr30957-1.c match the current compiler behaviour. The test-case made sense for the time the committed code was working in the compiler. It then regressed at some point, and was marked as xfail. Xfailing means that the *only* information you can get out of this test-case is that foo returns -0.0 again. We're better off testing the expected compiler behaviour, which might also regress for all sorts of reasons unrelated to this PR. As a bonus, we stop generating core files for this test, which give us no information, and stop overwriting other core files that may actually have relevance and could be for failures that are difficult to reproduce.