[Bug target/98833] [11 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769 since r11-6849-gee78c20e74d30284

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98833

--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Or rather keep the define_expand but remove the !TARGET_XOP from the
define_insn?
Will we be confused when we have two define_insns matching?