https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #34 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #33) > I suspect there is still a question, though, as to whether it is safe in > general for two objects with non-conflicting alias sets to share a stack > slot. Might also be related to PR93946? If postreload decides insn 131 is a redundant store to insn 103 then it needs to check for alias set compatibility. Note that in some cases is difficult (see PR101641). I wonder if the PR93946 fix is still incomplete - did you trace to the code pieces in postreload.cc that removes the store? There's no union involved here though but a memcpy used in BitCast.
