[Bug ipa/65237] New: [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[Bug ipa/65237] New: [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

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

            Bug ID: 65237
           Summary: [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions
           Product: gcc
           Version: 5.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: ipa
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
                CC: hubicka at ucw dot cz

On Linux/x86, r221040 caused:

FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-1.c scan-ipa-dump cp "Alignment 2"
FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-2.c scan-ipa-dump cp "Alignment 8, misalignment 4"
FAIL: gcc.dg/noreturn-7.c  (test for warnings, line 30)
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mno-stackrealign 
scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-16,[^\\n]*sp 2
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mno-stackrealign 
scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-8,[^\\n]*sp 2
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mstackrealign 
scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-16,[^\\n]*sp 2
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mstackrealign 
scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-8,[^\\n]*sp 2

and may be

FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin
-flto-partition=none  line 32 a[0] == 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O2  line 21 a.i == 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  line 21 a.i == 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O3 -g  line 21 a.i == 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -Os  line 21 a.i == 4

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[iains at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-02-27
                 CC|                            |iains at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #0)
> On Linux/x86, r221040 caused:
> 
> FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-1.c scan-ipa-dump cp "Alignment 2"
> FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-2.c scan-ipa-dump cp "Alignment 8, misalignment 4"

I suspect these ^^^ were unintentional commits - part of a different patch,

> FAIL: gcc.dg/noreturn-7.c  (test for warnings, line 30)
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mno-stackrealign 
> scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-16,[^\\n]*sp 2
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mno-stackrealign 
> scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-8,[^\\n]*sp 2
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mstackrealign 
> scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-16,[^\\n]*sp 2
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mstackrealign 
> scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-8,[^\\n]*sp 2
> 
> and may be
> 
> FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin
> -flto-partition=none  line 32 a[0] == 4
> FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O2  line 21 a.i == 4
> FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  line 21 a.i == 4
> FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O3 -g  line 21 a.i == 4
> FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -Os  line 21 a.i == 4


On Darwin we also see:
gcc.dg/attr-noinline.c (all cases fail)

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu]

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

howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu

--- Comment #2 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(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

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[marxin at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(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.
>From gcc-bugs-return-478754-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Feb 27 15:27:12 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-478754-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 58321 invoked by alias); 27 Feb 2015 15:27:12 -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 58232 invoked by uid 48); 27 Feb 2015 15:27:08 -0000
From: "iains at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 15:47:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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-65237-4-VTr0M6RDK5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65237-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65237-4@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/msg03086.txt.bz2
Content-length: 601

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide237

--- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
((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?ide150#c13

That was before Honza did his last round of analysis/changes, just want to be
sure what the correct "fix" is - after all we used to pass that test, right?

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

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

--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Yes, I think the test should be decoared with dg-require-alias.

Well, the test used to pass.

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[iains at gcc dot gnu.org]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 3322 bytes --]

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?

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

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

--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I sorry, I did not meant to commit ipa-cp-[1,2] patches. Will remove them
shortly.

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

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

--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> 
> FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-1.c scan-ipa-dump cp "Alignment 2"
> FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-2.c scan-ipa-dump cp "Alignment 8, misalignment 4"

Sorry, these was unintentinal commits, I will revert them soon.
> FAIL: gcc.dg/noreturn-7.c  (test for warnings, line 30)

Here we do merging before outputting a warning (testcase expects two warnings).
I suppose there is not much to do than -fno-ipa-cp.
Once user adds one noreturn, he will get warning for anohter, because the
functions will no longer get merged.
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mno-stackrealign 
> scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-16,[^\\n]*sp 2
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mno-stackrealign 
> scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-8,[^\\n]*sp 2
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mstackrealign 
> scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-16,[^\\n]*sp 2
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stackalign/longlong-2.c -mstackrealign 
> scan-assembler-times and[lq]?[^\\n]*-8,[^\\n]*sp 2

I suppose here we merge 
void f2 (void)
{
  unsigned long long a __attribute__((aligned (8)));
  fn (&a);
}

and 

void f4 (void)
{
  unsigned long long a __attribute__((aligned (16)));
  fn (&a);
}

I already discussed with Martin yesterday that we need to compare alignments.
I think he has patch on a way

Honza

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

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

--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> > 
> > 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

I would just add -fno-ipa-cp.  The testcase matching does not expect functions
to be turned into
wrappers - it counts number of occurences of calls after optimization.  I will
fix that, too.

Honza

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Fri Feb 27 16:56:57 2015
New Revision: 221065

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221065&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:

    PR ipa/65237
    * gcc.dg/attr-noinline.c: Add -fno-ipa-icf
    * gcc.dg/noreturn-7.c: Add -fno-ipa-icf.
    * gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-1.c: Revert accidental commit.
    * gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-2.c: Revert accidental commit.

Removed:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-1.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-cp-2.c
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/attr-noinline.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/noreturn-7.c

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

Pat Haugen <pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |dje at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #12 from Pat Haugen <pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Commentary got lost for prior attachment...

483.xalancbmk from cpu2006 started to fail building on powerpc64[le] with the
subject revision.

Not sure if this should really be directed at pr64988 since it's the same ICE,
but starting here since it was introduced with r221040.


[pthaugen@igoo delta]$ /home/pthaugen/install/gcc/gcc_hunt/bin/g++ -c -m64 -O2
DOMBuilderImpl.cpp
DOMBuilderImpl.cpp:27:2: error: Alias and target's comdat groups differs
  }
  ^
_ZN11xercesc_2_514DOMBuilderImpl11resetErrorsEv/7 (virtual void
xercesc_2_5::DOMBuilderImpl::resetErrors()) @0xfff85df20d0
  Type: function definition analyzed
  Visibility: externally_visible public virtual
  Address is taken.
  References: 
  Referring: *.LTHUNK0/5
(alias)_ZN11xercesc_2_514DOMBuilderImpl13resetEntitiesEv/4
(alias)_ZTVN11xercesc_2_514DOMBuilderImplE/8 (addr)
  Availability: available
  First run: 0
  Function flags: body icf_merged
  Called by: 
  Calls: 
*.LTHUNK0/5 (virtual void *.LTHUNK0()) @0xfff85df1db0
  Type: function definition analyzed alias cpp_implicit_alias
  Visibility: prevailing_def_ironly
comdat_group:_ZN11xercesc_2_514DOMBuilderImpl13resetEntitiesEv virtual
artificial
  Same comdat group as:
_ZThn8_N11xercesc_2_514DOMBuilderImpl13resetEntitiesEv/6
  References: _ZN11xercesc_2_514DOMBuilderImpl11resetErrorsEv/7 (alias)
  Referring: 
  Availability: available
  First run: 0
  Function flags:
  Called by: _ZThn8_N11xercesc_2_514DOMBuilderImpl13resetEntitiesEv/6 (1.00 per
call) 
  Calls: 
DOMBuilderImpl.cpp:27:2: internal compiler error: verify_cgraph_node failed
0x104f4f83 cgraph_node::verify_node()
    /home/pthaugen/src/gcc/gcc_hunt/gcc/gcc/cgraph.c:3031
0x104e6d97 symtab_node::verify()
    /home/pthaugen/src/gcc/gcc_hunt/gcc/gcc/symtab.c:1103
0x104e6e97 symtab_node::verify_symtab_nodes()
    /home/pthaugen/src/gcc/gcc_hunt/gcc/gcc/symtab.c:1123
0x107b148b symbol_table::remove_unreachable_nodes(_IO_FILE*)
    /home/pthaugen/src/gcc/gcc_hunt/gcc/gcc/ipa.c:686
0x108bf4b3 execute_todo
    /home/pthaugen/src/gcc/gcc_hunt/gcc/gcc/passes.c:2023
Please submit a full bug report,

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The alias is really in a wrong comdat group.  C++ FE should produce lthunk
correctly. It may be related to PR64988
I suppose the code I added to resolve_alias to redirect aliases of aliases to
their target triggered more of sanity check here.

I am looking into the ARM alias issue and will try to look into this later
today.

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

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

--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #12)
> Commentary got lost for prior attachment...
> 
> 483.xalancbmk from cpu2006 started to fail building on powerpc64[le] with
> the subject revision.
> 

I got the same error on Linux/x86-64.

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P1
   Target Milestone|---                         |5.0

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |WAITING

--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We mixed several issues in this PR, but I believe all are now fixed.

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

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

H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |NEW

--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #16)
> We mixed several issues in this PR, but I believe all are now fixed.

As of r221117,  I still see

FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin
-flto-partition=none  line 32 a[0] == 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O2  line 21 a.i == 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  line 21 a.i == 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -O3 -g  line 21 a.i == 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c   -Os  line 21 a.i == 4

on Linux/x86-32.

[Bug ipa/65237] [5 Regression] r221040 caused many regressions

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #18 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We have https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63572 about debugging
issues. I added the note there and closing this one.