Regressions on trunk at revision 238902 vs revision 238856

[H.J. Lu Intel64 Core i7]

New failures:
FAIL: 20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 2259)
FAIL: 20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 2259)
FAIL: 20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/literals/range.cc  (test for errors, line 796)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/literals/range.cc  (test for errors, line 796)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/literals/range.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg1.cc  (test for errors, line 246)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg1.cc  (test for errors, line 246)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg1.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg2.cc  (test for errors, line 247)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg2.cc  (test for errors, line 247)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg2.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg3.cc  (test for errors, line 249)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg3.cc  (test for errors, line 249)
FAIL: 20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg3.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 20_util/make_signed/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 1924)
FAIL: 20_util/make_signed/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 1924)
FAIL: 20_util/make_signed/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 1777)
FAIL: 20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 1777)
FAIL: 20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 1820)
FAIL: 20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 1820)
FAIL: 20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 20_util/ratio/operations/ops_overflow_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 435)
FAIL: 20_util/ratio/operations/ops_overflow_neg.cc  (test for errors, line 435)
FAIL: 20_util/ratio/operations/ops_overflow_neg.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c scan-tree-dump forwprop1 "if \\(_[0-9]* == 0\\)"

New passes:
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c scan-tree-dump ccp1 "gimple_simplified to if \\(_[0-9]* == 0\\)"