https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=124174
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan <acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #1) > >it is wrong because a NEON vadd should be well-defined on overflow > > As we discussed internally, I disagree with this claim, so I'm not convinced > this is actually a bug. As per https://github.com/ARM-software/acle/blob/main/neon_intrinsics/advsimd.md, vaddq_s32 is specified to have the behaviour of the NEON instruction: ADD Vd.4S,Vn.4S,Vm.4S which is well-defined on overflow. Likewise for the other types, of course.
