This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/82244] [7/8 Regression] -O2: ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst in replace_uses_by, at tree-cfg.c:1904
- From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:57:27 +0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/82244] [7/8 Regression] -O2: ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst in replace_uses_by, at tree-cfg.c:1904
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-82244-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82244
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work| |6.4.0
Target Milestone|--- |7.3
Summary|-O2: ICE: tree check: |[7/8 Regression] -O2: ICE:
|expected ssa_name, have |tree check: expected
|integer_cst in |ssa_name, have integer_cst
|replace_uses_by, at |in replace_uses_by, at
|tree-cfg.c:1904 |tree-cfg.c:1904
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So we're creating
<bb 10> [9.35%] [count: INV]:
f_26 = ASSERT_EXPR <f_7(ab), (unsigned int) f_7(ab) <= 4294967289>;
_2 = f_26 & 2;
if (_2 != 0)
goto <bb 11>; [33.00%] [count: INV]
else
goto <bb 12>; [67.00%] [count: INV]
<bb 11> [3.08%] [count: INV]:
f_27 = ASSERT_EXPR <f_26, (unsigned int) f_26 + 4294967294 <= 4294967293>;
f_28(ab) = ASSERT_EXPR <f_27, f_27 != 0>;
h ();
where we are able to fold f_26 to zero and thus end up with
f_28(ab) = ASSERT_EXPR <0, 0 != 0>;
when we are trying to get rid of asserts. But we may not propagate the
constant.