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 796FC385DC06; Thu,  2 Apr 2020 01:03:38 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 796FC385DC06
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1585789418;
 bh=D6PxMf98CTlFf5hkeR8Q5asLyZLdWuWs6YoVl1Y8Q7U=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=rWfS2Xh+rH6wUw7euuWtMTlRSUYGcvJXd+E+semqjbhsORlNBzZqZ+BJlJLaYxKyK
 VE1L4CesU7AfuxGm4cO2SDMeX9cbrO0ta2l7mXTZngo6oqBmk4LbYvAp2vu97YGqvE
 tzUGk4Kj/srV9XauPuE/tC4x9umSqUc4wHAl3QYU=
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/94449] [10 Regression] FAIL:
 gcc.c-torture/execute/pr92904.c gcc.dg/torture/pr48731.c
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 01:03:38 +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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status
Message-ID: <bug-94449-4-UsZVAWmZlN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-94449-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-94449-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 01:03:38 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94449

Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
May I ask for the configuration option?=20

I used x86_64 machine in CFarm with cpuinfo

processor       : 0
vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
cpu family      : 6
model           : 45
model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2660 0 @ 2.20GHz
...

I was unable to reproduce it with default configuration setting, but I was =
able
to=20
see the ICE with -march=3Dznver2 specified for the failures.=20
I suspected there was some basic arch setting in your configuration? If so,=
 I'm
wondering one more reasonable configuration option for E5 machine, it would
help to catch regression failures like this. Thanks in advance!=