https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82628
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The problem seems to be in if_then_else_cond, which is called on (plus:SI (ltu:SI (reg:SI 93) (subreg:SI (reg/v:DI 89 [ d ]) 0)) (subreg:SI (reg/v:DI 89 [ d ]) 4)) and returns a bogus thing - return value (reg/v:DI 89 [ d ]) and both false and true rtxes (const_int 0 [0]).