https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82776
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- Well, one decision needs to be made is whether such bound information should be covered by -faggressive-loop-optimizations. We already did this for undefined behavior of sign type and array bound. OTOH, this doesn't look like too aggressive since we already rely on undefined behavior for pointer/signed types in SCEV. Note I made change assuming non-wrap pointer all the time in r250765, but seems some kernel code depends on that, i.e, PR82694. We may need to revert the change and only assume non-wrap pointer when !flag_wrapv. Thanks.
