https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106078
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> > For this one it's PRE hoisting *b across the endless loop (PRE handles
> > calls as possibly not returning but not loops as possibly not
> > terminating...)
> > So it's a different bug.
> > For this one it's PRE hoisting *b across the endless loop (PRE handles
> > calls as possibly not returning but not loops as possibly not
> > terminating...)
> > So it's a different bug.
>
> Btw, C++ requiring forward progress makes the testcase undefined.
In my understanding access to volatil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106078
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #1)
> > This is version that does not need -fnon-call-exceptions
> > If called test (NULL, 0) it should be indefinitely i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106078
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106078
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-06-24
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106078
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
This is version that does not need -fnon-call-exceptions
If called test (NULL, 0) it should be indefinitely increasing val rather then
segfaulting. Seems clang gets this one right.
int array[1];
volatile
