From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 7D5EA385DC35; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 03:15:15 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7D5EA385DC35 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1593659715; bh=OI6oqT8ZGx/OhCtKk/cuhXY9VR0hr0YWNAFpv7fWhUs=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ecJ5zZR5v+osW3gNwl46yFPY04sr8/VMsyE2z2xjo0UPHrAyRSgOvn933YdLzOEPH SWEziV4Pon8Xq6JrugSPIJVgV/XtNWLOaanuctpQWsunrgnMxks22G0yWO5s19116g 32k7z9igyBtoGypm3wg15WxpxujRDrtXEVDRcLOY= From: "hp at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug bootstrap/95940] [11 Regression] bootstrap broken by -Wmaybe-unintialized warnings Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 03:15:15 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: hp at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 03:15:15 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95940 --- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #6) > > From the look of it, something is already miscompiled. >=20 > No, not at all, it's just warnings turned into errors. Not obvious, but I see from the comments that people seem to be on the right track. Some target-specific thing under the hood (not obvious to me in the source) in tree-ssanames.c provoking this? FWIW, this problem did not manifest on neither ppc64le, x86_64 nor aarch64, same source. (All *-linux.)=