[Bug target/66620] bfin: bfin.c: (hwloop_optimize): gcc_assert (JUMP_P (insn)) fails.

["gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66620

--- Comment #2 from Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Mikhail Maltsev from comment #1)
> Started with r208165.

OK, thanks. Really it is, it is valuable to me (it can generate the correct
insns for comparing). And also if remove "-fno-reorder-blocks", it can generate
correct insns too (after comparing with the original correct insns, this
optimized insns are correct).

In our case, the issue insn is:

(insn 132 59 74 6 (parallel [
            (set (reg:SI 45 LT1)
                (label_ref 74))
            (set (reg:SI 49 LB1)
                (label_ref 133))
            (set (reg:SI 47 LC1)
                (reg:SI 8 P0 [112]))
        ]) lpt_commit.i:11 -1
     (nil))

it is in an incorrect area, which want to optimize the insns below in another
area:

(note 68 67 69 9 [bb 9] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
(insn:TI 69 68 109 9 (set (reg/v:SI 0 R0 [orig:94 iip ] [94])
        (plus:SI (reg/v:SI 0 R0 [orig:94 iip ] [94])
            (const_int 1 [0x1]))) lpt_commit.i:19 50 {addsi3}
     (nil))
(jump_insn:TI 109 69 73 9 (parallel [
            (set (pc)
                (if_then_else (ne (reg:SI 8 P0 [112])
                        (const_int 1 [0x1]))
                    (label_ref:SI 70) 
                    (pc)))
            (set (reg:SI 8 P0 [112])
                (plus:SI (reg:SI 8 P0 [112])
                    (const_int -1 [0xffffffffffffffff])))
            (unspec [
                    (const_int 0 [0])
                ] 10) 
            (clobber (scratch:SI))
        ]) lpt_commit.i:19 96 {loop_end}
     (int_list:REG_BR_PROB 7384 (nil))
 -> 70) 

The incorrect insn wants to merge the too "for (iip = 0; iip < 4; iip++) {...}"
in one.

Next, I shall continue analyzing it, and the all related insns are in
attachments. And welcome any ideas, suggestions and completions, Thanks.