optimization/7799: [3.2/3.3 regression] Loop bug with optimization flag -Os in gcc

[Christian Ehrhardt]

On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 02:49:01PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > This transformation is IMHO illegal because there is no way to make the
> > comparison in general equivialent to that in the original for loop.
> > If p is initially 0x7ffffffc the comparison must be treated as unsigned,
> > however, if p is initially 0xfffffffc the comparison must be treated as
> > signed.
> 
> Well-known deficiency of the strength reduction pass (see the testcase 
> testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c which is XFAILed on x86 at -Os).

Thanks for the clarification. This means that we can close the report?
I can confirm that using -fno-strength-reduce fixes the problem.

    regards  Christian

-- 
THAT'S ALL FOLKS!