https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65237

--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> (In reply to howarth from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #1)
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Darwin we also see:
> > > gcc.dg/attr-noinline.c (all cases fail)
> > 
> > Didin't Martin analyze this failure as the test case just needing "/* {
> > dg-require-alias "" }  */"?
> > 
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65150#c13
> 
> Yes, I think the test should be decoared with dg-require-alias.

hmm.. so should we understand that we used to pass that test .. "incorrectly?"
.. 
.. it's not clear to me that changing the test to require symbol alias isn't
still a regression … (I'd like to understand that the code-gen is equivalent).
>From gcc-bugs-return-478757-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Feb 27 15:31:54 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-478757-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 69894 invoked by alias); 27 Feb 2015 15:31:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 69853 invoked by uid 48); 27 Feb 2015 15:31:50 -0000
From: "aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/65235] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] Simplifying vec_select of vec_concat miscompiles when first element of vec_concat is const_int
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 15:58:00 -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: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-65235-4-Fa8MNoCHzs@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65235-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65235-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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/msg03089.txt.bz2
Content-length: 603

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide235

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hi.  The known to work field is empty.  Is this a regression?

I can't reproduce on a cross build to --targetªrch64-linux by running cc1.
What options causes this to fail?  Could you post a preprocessed file for the
test?