https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67915
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Index: gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c (revision 228753)
+++ gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c (working copy)
@@ -103,17 +103,22 @@ cleanup_control_expr_graph (basic_block
edge e;
edge_iterator ei;
bool warned;
- location_t loc;
fold_defer_overflow_warnings ();
- loc = gimple_location (stmt);
switch (gimple_code (stmt))
{
case GIMPLE_COND:
- val = fold_binary_loc (loc, gimple_cond_code (stmt),
- boolean_type_node,
- gimple_cond_lhs (stmt),
- gimple_cond_rhs (stmt));
+ val = const_binop (gimple_cond_code (stmt),
+ boolean_type_node,
+ gimple_cond_lhs (stmt), gimple_cond_rhs (stmt));
+ if (!val)
+ {
+ tree tem = fold_binary (gimple_cond_code (stmt),
+ boolean_type_node,
+ gimple_cond_lhs (stmt),
+ gimple_cond_rhs (stmt));
+ gcc_assert (!tem || TREE_CODE (tem) != INTEGER_CST);
+ }
break;
case GIMPLE_SWITCH:
fails in configuring stage2 gcc/ on
if (_12 < 0)
but probably because of your earlier patch now ... and with that disabled on
if (base.96 != base.96)
which is during CFG build in stage2 libcpp lex.c. It's the GIMPLIFIERs
"CSE" producing
<bb 101>:
base.96 = base;
base.96 = base;
if (base.96 != base.96)
(see gimplify.c:lookup_tmp_var) and us not folding that stmt during
gimplification (the thing to fix). Let's see how far I get with that ;)
