[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 --- Comment #14 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d54151df3ba0ee3203e0b8cb8f8fcd168a766c51 commit r14-10184-gd54151df3ba0ee3203e0b8cb8f8fcd168a766c51 Author: Jakub

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 --- Comment #13 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9adec2d91e62a479474ae79df5b455fd4b8463ba commit r15-315-g9adec2d91e62a479474ae79df5b455fd4b8463ba Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 --- Comment #12 from Paul Eggert --- Thanks for fixing GCC. I installed into Gnulib a patch that clarifies strftime's implementation, and this also works around the GCC bug. It'll take some time for this to propagate out, though, as Gnulib is

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58121 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58121=edit gcc15-pr114965.patch Full untested fix.

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amacleod at redhat dot com --- Comment #8

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- Reduded testcase that fails at -O1 (but passes at -O2): ``` [[gnu::noipa]] static void g(char pad1) { if (pad1 != '0' && pad1 != '+' && pad1 != '_') __builtin_unreachable(); if (pad1 == '0'

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Oh I see where the bug is coming from. reassociation is turning: _2 = pad_6 == 48; _3 = pad_6 == 43; _4 = _2 | _3; Into: _11 = (unsigned char) pad_6; _12 = (int) _11; _13 = 290271069732864 >>

[Bug tree-optimization/114965] [13/14/15 Regression] wrong code generated for Emacs/Gnulib strftime (regression from 13.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[14/15 Regression] wrong|[13/14/15 Regression] wrong