[Bug tree-optimization/92115] [10 Regression] ICE in gimple_cond_get_ops_from_tree, at gimple-expr.c:577

[iii at linux dot ibm.com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92115

--- Comment #6 from Ilya Leoshkevich <iii at linux dot ibm.com> ---
> Am 16.10.2019 um 16:32 schrieb asolokha at gmx dot com <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>:
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92115
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Arseny Solokha <asolokha at gmx dot com> ---
> (In reply to Ilya Leoshkevich from comment #3)
>> Arseny, how did you find this? Did you just run the regtest? I wonder why
>> didn't I see it during my test runs.
> 
> My test harness continuously compiles a corpus of C, C++, and Fortran code with
> the latest weekly trunk snapshot, picking a random set of compiler options and
> parameters for each file. gcc and libstdc++ test suites constitute an important
> part of that corpus. When compiling files from these test suites, my test
> harness ignores compiler options specified there for DejaGNU and uses its own
> randomly chosen ones instead. Of course, this approach is not suitable for
> testing run-time correctness.
> 
> So, if there are no testcases in the test suite yet which could trigger that
> specific code path in gcc internals, probably due to an unusual set of compiler
> options, your testing won't reveal a problem reported here. That is probably
> OK, as regression testing have to be deterministic, after all.

Hi Arseny,

Did you per chance open-source it?

Best regards,
Ilya