https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90562
--- Comment #3 from Tudor Bosman ---
The bug also exists in gcc 8.3.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90562
--- Comment #1 from Tudor Bosman ---
Note that the behavior is correct (the thread local variable has the same
address) with -O0, but incorrect with -O1 or above.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: tudorb at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This is reduced from production code.
I have an inline function (not "static inline", just "inli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81329
--- Comment #2 from Tudor Bosman ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> There are a few duplicates of this bug floating around.
I figured, but I don't know anything about gcc internals to tell which of these
duplicates are the same bu
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: tudorb at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 41689
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41689&action=edit
Missed maybe-uninitialized warning: test case
The attached test case should warn, as
