https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
--- Comment #6 from Ulrich Weigand <uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I guess I can see why there might be an abnormal edge starting at bb 3, or at least, that the compiler might not be easily able to deduce that it isn't necessary. However, I do not understand why any of the abnormal edges *target* bb5 *before* the setjmp call. Shouldn't an abnormal edge due to a longjmp end up *after* the setjmp? After all, the setjmp itself (including the preparation of its arguments) is *not* executed twice; the effect of the longjmp is simply to make the setjmp *return* twice.
