https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71661
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #5) > We can likely invalidate the cached information, but ISTM that there's a > reasonable chance we're going to be playing whack-a-mole with this stuff. Unfortunately playing whack-a-mole is what we need to do here, as with any other on-the-side information we keep up-to-date (like range info, points-to, EH info, etc.).
