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 E537C3857C4E; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 20:42:35 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E537C3857C4E
From: "sfranzen85 at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/97474] New: Regression: optimization produces wrong code
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 20:42:35 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: sfranzen85 at hotmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
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: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status
 keywords bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
 target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-97474-4@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: <https://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: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 20:42:36 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97474

            Bug ID: 97474
           Summary: Regression: optimization produces wrong code
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: wrong-code
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: sfranzen85 at hotmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

While searching for something different I found the following example code
demonstrating a possible gcc bug:
---
#include <iostream>
using std::cout;

struct A {
    int a;
    int& b;

    A(int x) : a(x), b(a) {}
    A(const A& other) : a(other.a), b(a) {}
    A() : a(0), b(a) {}
};

int foo(A a) {
    a.a *=3D a.b;
    return a.b;
}


int main() {
    A a(3);

    cout << foo(a) << '\n';
    return 0;
}
---
(Source:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62853805/why-does-modifying-a-field-tha=
t-is-referenced-by-another-variable-lead-to-unexpe)

I was unable to find a related bug report, hence this one. Wrong output (3
instead of 9) is produced with -O1 or higher, since gcc version 6.4, as
mentioned in a comment. Indeed gcc trunk on godbolt still generates faulty
code: https://godbolt.org/z/TcedxE.=