https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=123894
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2026-01-30
Keywords| |wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed. This is a specific issue with preserve_access_index. It could be the
way preserve_access_index causes:
MEM <<unnamed-signed:5>> [(void *)_6];
Which might be either a middle-end issue or maybe the backend should expand
preserve_access_index accesses differently.
