[Bug middle-end/66348] Simple loop never exits with -O1, exits with -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66348 Sebastiano Vigna changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/99623] Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 --- Comment #10 from Sebastiano Vigna --- Ahem no, my correction goes in the opposite direction it should go. I'll ask suggestions to the library authors. I really apologize for all the noise.

[Bug c/99623] Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 --- Comment #9 from Sebastiano Vigna --- Finally solved: the problematic statement if (h == NULL) h = (struct prb_node *)&tree->prb_root; should just be if (h == NULL) h = tree->prb_root->prb_link[0]; The position in memory of the two pointer

[Bug c/99623] Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 --- Comment #8 from Sebastiano Vigna --- I'm sorry, I did the test on the wrong file. No, you cannot eliminate the &, even if the type is correct, and h can be NULL at that point. I'll ask the libavl maintainers their opinion. We can compile with

[Bug c/99623] Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 Sebastiano Vigna changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/99623] Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 --- Comment #6 from Sebastiano Vigna --- Created attachment 50410 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50410&action=edit Source

[Bug c/99623] Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 --- Comment #5 from Sebastiano Vigna --- Created attachment 50409 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50409&action=edit Source

[Bug c/99623] Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 --- Comment #2 from Sebastiano Vigna --- Created attachment 50408 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50408&action=edit Source

[Bug c/99623] Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 --- Comment #1 from Sebastiano Vigna --- Created attachment 50407 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50407&action=edit Output of gcc with -O2

[Bug c/99623] New: Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99623 Bug ID: 99623 Summary: Code behaves differently at -O2 optimization Product: gcc Version: 10.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c