From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3AA6388C00C for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:34:15 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org C3AA6388C00C Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=math.univ-lyon1.fr Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=denis@math.univ-lyon1.fr Received: from [IPv6:2a01:e34:ec15:6750:64ec:ac75:a3bb:9f78] (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e34:ec15:6750:64ec:ac75:a3bb:9f78]) (Authenticated sender: denis.roland) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BB27B00595; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:34:11 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: Kind of undefined behavior (or bug?) with GCC 10.1 To: Jonathan Wakely Cc: gcc-help References: From: Roland Denis Message-ID: <81e57fb0-eac7-449d-6e2d-cd7c6e9f340b@math.univ-lyon1.fr> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:34:26 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, KAM_SHORT, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_SOFTFAIL, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-help mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:34:17 -0000 Thanks for your quick answer and the update on the bugtracker ! In a way, I'm relieved it's not my code's fault ;) I will keep an eye on this bug report. Regards, -- Roland DENIS Le 16/06/2020 à 14:59, Jonathan Wakely a écrit : > On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 at 12:58, Roland Denis wrote: >> Am I missing something important or does that look like a GCC bug ? > It's a bug. It started with https://gcc.gnu.org/r271510 and was fixed > in the master branch by https://gcc.gnu.org/r11-963 which was > addressing https://gcc.gnu.org/PR95493 which is a different bug. > >> PS: result is correct with trunk version of GCC in godbolt, does that >> mean it is an already solved bug? > Looks like it, but I've added a comment to PR 95493 so that it can be > investigated and we can be sure your problem is really fixed.