http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58946
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to octoploid from comment #1) > Started with r204194. Yes I expected failures to happen in reassoc due it not being well tested before and now my patch is forcing the path inside reassoc being a lot more than before. Most likely you could get a test case that exposes this before my patch.
