should we do something like this to tweak the testcases?   or does 
someone have something else in mind?

Richi opened a PR for the STL failure (109350)

Andrew





On 3/31/23 13:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 01:02:18PM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>> I guess it figures the recip is safe to put in, there will not be a divide
>> by zero.
> I think the problem was that 1/d was hoisted before the loop; as long as
> it is guarded with the d > 0.01 or e > 0.005 condition, it is fine.
> The test probably should have been a runtime test, doing the main stuff
> in some other noipa function and doing fetestexcept after it or something
> similar.
>
>> I guess the test is no longer testing what it should be?
>>
>> And yes, we could set he param back to 1 for the test...
>> add   --param=ranger-recompute-depth=1   makes the "issue" go away :-)  for
>> now.
> That looks reasonable unless we rewrite the test into runtime one (but we'd
> then need to double check that it was really miscompiled and would fail back
> then in 4.0).
>
> 	Jakub
>