https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1820137ba624d7eb2004a10f9632498b6bc1696a
commit r12-6150-g1820137ba624d7eb2004a10f9632498b6bc1696a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> Created attachment 52089 [details]
> gcc12-pr103860.patch
>
> Not sure I understand what you'd like to see.
Exactly what you did :-) Well, I didn't see y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52088|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
That looks good. But can you always set maybe_check_pro to true (and then
optimise it away of course)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In the:
while (!vec.is_empty () && pro != entry)
{
while (pro != entry && !can_get_prologue (pro, prologue_clobbered))
{
pro = get_immediate_dominator (CDI_DOMINATORS, pro);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This seems to be clearly a shrink-wrapping bug.
Before pro_and_epilogue we have in RTL:
(note 4 1 2 2 [bb 2] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
(note 2 4 3 2 NOTE_INSN_FUNCTION_BEG)
(insn 3 2 34 2 (set (reg/v:QI 0 ax [o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-29
Summary|wrong cod
