https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112335

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
  __old_p_6 = MEM[(struct s * &)ps1_2(D)];
  MEM[(struct s * &)ps1_2(D)] = 0B;
  if (__old_p_6 != 0B)
    goto <bb 3>; [53.47%]
  else
    goto <bb 4>; [46.53%]

  <bb 3> [local count: 574129752]:
  s::~s (__old_p_6);
  operator delete (__old_p_6, 1);

  <bb 4> [local count: 1073741824]:
  __p_4 = MEM[(struct s * &)ps2_3(D)];
  MEM[(struct s * &)ps2_3(D)] = 0B;
  __old_p_5 = MEM[(struct s * &)ps1_2(D)];

Well s::~s could touch the reference std::unique_ptr<s> (ps1).

So this could in theory be an invalid optimization.

I am not sure if that is the only issue here though.

Reply via email to