[Bug tree-optimization/115712] [15 regression] Binutils testsuite fails 2 tests (libnew1a.so, libnew1b.so)

[sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115712

--- Comment #2 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Between 14 and 15, the main difference is:
```
│  0000000000000000 <main>:
│  main():
│  /tmp/gcc-binutils-PR115712/dl5.cc:45
│       sub    $0x8,%rsp
│ -/tmp/gcc-binutils-PR115712/dl5.cc:46
│ -     mov    $0x58,%edi
│ -     call   e <main+0xe>
│ - R_X86_64_PLT32      operator new[](unsigned long)-0x4
│ -/tmp/gcc-binutils-PR115712/dl5.cc:46 (discriminator 1)
│ -     movq   $0xa,(%rax)
│ -/tmp/gcc-binutils-PR115712/dl5.cc:46
│ -     mov    %rax,%rdi
│ -/tmp/gcc-binutils-PR115712/dl5.cc:47
│ -     call   1d <main+0x1d>
│ - R_X86_64_PLT32      operator delete[](void*)-0x4
│  /tmp/gcc-binutils-PR115712/dl5.cc:48
│       lea    0x0(%rip),%rsi
│   R_X86_64_PC32       std::nothrow-0x4
│       mov    $0x58,%edi
│ -     call   2e <main+0x2e>
│ +     call   15 <main+0x15>
│   R_X86_64_PLT32      operator new[](unsigned long, std::nothrow_t
const&)-0x4
│  /tmp/gcc-binutils-PR115712/dl5.cc:48 (discriminator 1)
│       test   %rax,%rax
│ -     je     42 <main+0x42>
│ -     movq   $0xa,(%rax)
│ -/tmp/gcc-binutils-PR115712/dl5.cc:48 (discriminator 4)
│ +     je     22 <main+0x22>
```