https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111877
Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2023-10-19
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot
gnu.org
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> possibly fixed already
Sadly no, this is a third case where neither loop uses the value at all.
It's kept because the tree gets versioned and so it thinks the second loop
needs it. I should probably always remove it if the first loop doesn't use it
and fix it up in the guard creation instead.
