https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102505
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed| |2021-09-27
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target| |x86_64-*-*
Component|c++ |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=93516,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=93667,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=93845,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=93776,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=94598,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=96730,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=96820,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=101626
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords| |ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed more reduced:
struct D { int i; int pad alignas(16); };
struct B : virtual D
{
int j =84;
int k =84;
};
struct C: B { };
int main()
{
C c;
if (c.j != 84 || c.k != 84)
__builtin_abort();
}
---- CUT ----
Most likely r10-6276-g1d8593070a62b.
What I don't get is why the ICE only happens on x86_64 and not on aarch64. I
moved over to using alignas instead of long double to be similar on both
targets.
