https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94103
--- Comment #10 from Alexander Cherepanov <ch3root at openwall dot com> --- The case of assignment+memcpy -- testcases in comment 0, in pr92824 and similar -- is fixed. But the case of memset+assignment -- pr93270 and pr61872 (these seem to be dups) -- is not fixed. Is it supposed to be fixed? Before, I've seen somewhat contradicting approaches in bug 92486, comment 12, which says that memset+assignment should set padding in structs, and in bug 93270, comment 4, which implies that memset+assignment shouldn't set padding in long double. I'm in no way trying to imply that memset+assignment should or shouldn't be fixed, just wondering if there is a difference of two cases.
