Hi, As PR110652 and its duplicate PRs show, there could be one build error
error: 'new_temp' may be used uninitialized for some build configurations. It's a false positive warning (or error at -Werror), but in order to make the build succeed, this patch is to initialize the reported variable 'new_temp' as NULL_TREE. Confirmed this patch fixed the reported issue in PR110652 (with the same configuration). Is it ok for trunk? BR, Kewen ----- PR tree-optimization/110652 gcc/ChangeLog: * tree-vect-stmts.cc (vectorizable_load): Initialize new_temp as NULL_TREE. --- gcc/tree-vect-stmts.cc | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.cc index c08d0ef951f..cb86d544313 100644 --- a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.cc +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.cc @@ -9297,7 +9297,8 @@ vectorizable_load (vec_info *vinfo, class loop *containing_loop = gimple_bb (stmt_info->stmt)->loop_father; bool nested_in_vect_loop = false; tree elem_type; - tree new_temp; + /* Avoid false positive uninitialized warning, see PR110652. */ + tree new_temp = NULL_TREE; machine_mode mode; tree dummy; tree dataref_ptr = NULL_TREE; -- 2.31.1