https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103152
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail| |12.0
Known to work| |11.1.0, 11.2.0
Target Milestone|11.3 |12.0
Summary|[11/12 Regression] wrong |[12 Regression] wrong code
|code at -O1 on |at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu
|x86_64-linux-gnu since |since
|r11-5890-g7d9767cb8eea0f21 |r11-5890-g7d9767cb8eea0f21
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Started with r11-5890-g7d9767cb8eea0f21.
Yes and no.
Tthis was actually fixed for GCC 11 by r11-7587-b610c30453d8 (you can confirm
that if you want).
I messed up r12-4276-882d806c1a8 and added an extra TYPE_PRECISION (type) != 1
which should not have been there. Removing the extra TYPE_PRECISION (type) != 1
check fixes this issue too.
