https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #25 from Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox at inbox dot ru> ---
(In reply to Sergei Trofimovich from comment #22)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #17)
> > For me tree optimized dump is correct, so likely a target issue.
>
> Yeah, I agree. I finally understood why memory loads disappear (duh!).
>
> > @Sergei: Is GCC 9 working properly?
> > Would it be possible to bisect that?
>
> gcc-9 seems to work, bu I'm not sure if it's intentional or unrelated
> optimization passes change the code enough.
>
> I'll try to cook up even smaller example given that -fno-delayed-branch
> seems to be a culprit and then bisect gcc.
Bisected down to:
$ git bisect good
8c3785c43d490d4f234e21c9dee6bb1bb8d1dbdf is the first bad commit
commit 8c3785c43d490d4f234e21c9dee6bb1bb8d1dbdf
Author: Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
Date: Wed Dec 4 11:13:49 2019 +0100
Initialize a BB count in switch lowering.
2019-12-04 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
* tree-switch-conversion.c
(switch_decision_tree::try_switch_expansion):
Initialize count of newly created BB.
From-SVN: r278959
gcc/ChangeLog | 5 +++++
gcc/tree-switch-conversion.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
