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 AF7D43858D34; Thu,  2 Jul 2020 20:21:08 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AF7D43858D34
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1593721268;
 bh=exXYnc6YHXRuyOfnm9SKdsHABWLHeuAj9UjTJdKmSiE=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=iLmB4AOSnBhykimX9TeQwpFYJL8d9NuQ/uCyoLCgHbZcrpnCq2+dItkLMWH5fKK7u
 ssBA6b9NQSxu5D2LCa0RfPNWdW5nY9oY9yLomgLbE+ijiRURLDPcDBjPI38ELqrg8q
 S0I6NDuJAOLP9flL3pTQOktklvZqL1zZWqzLbooE=
From: "slyfox at inbox dot ru" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/96015] [10/11 Regression] gcc-10.1.0 miscompiles Python
 on hppa
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 20:21:08 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: slyfox at inbox dot ru
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.2
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-96015-4-ImeNoZSJbC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-96015-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-96015-4@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: <https://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 Jul 2020 20:21:08 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96015

--- Comment #22 from Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox at inbox dot ru> ---
(In reply to Martin Li=C5=A1ka from comment #17)
> For me tree optimized dump is correct, so likely a target issue.

Yeah, I agree. I finally understood why memory loads disappear (duh!).

> @Sergei: Is GCC 9 working properly?
> Would it be possible to bisect that?

gcc-9 seems to work, bu I'm not sure if it's intentional or unrelated
optimization passes change the code enough.

I'll try to cook up even smaller example given that -fno-delayed-branch see=
ms
to be a culprit and then bisect gcc.=