[Bug tree-optimization/101260] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

[stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260

--- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus  
---
The problem shows up for option -O1 (options -O{0,2,3} are fine) and GCC 10 and
11 (mainline and GCC 9 are fine).

[Bug tree-optimization/101260] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2021-06-30

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener  ---
Yeah, that wasn't a fix in any sense so the issue is likely still latent.  Note
there were some store-motion fixes that are not yet backported.

Btw, what options do you see the run-fail with?  Does it work fine with GCC 10?

I fear the failure needs more analysis to pin-point the root cause first.

[Bug tree-optimization/101260] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
I thought r12-145 was a missed-optimization fix and such generally undesirable
to backport, plus it introduced PR100492 and PR101009 regressions.