https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111860
Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2023-10-18
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #5 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed,
looks like the rename failed on one edge, BB 15 has:
;; basic block 15, loop depth 0, count 94607391 (estimated locally, freq
0.8010), maybe hot
;; prev block 10, next block 18, flags: (NEW, VISITED)
;; pred: 7 [11.0% (guessed)] count:94607391 (estimated locally, freq
0.8010) (FALSE_VALUE,EXECUTABLE)
# length_13 = PHI <length_17(7)>
# .MEM_8 = PHI <.MEM_30(7)>
and BB 19 has:
;; basic block 19, loop depth 0, count 105119324 (estimated locally, freq
0.8900), maybe hot
;; prev block 17, next block 8, flags: (NEW, REACHABLE, VISITED)
;; pred: 16 [33.3% (guessed)] count:81467477 (estimated locally, freq
0.6898) (FALSE_VALUE,EXECUTABLE)
;; 15 [25.0% (guessed)] count:23651848 (estimated locally, freq
0.2003) (TRUE_VALUE)
# length_47 = PHI <length_21(16), _61(15)>
# .MEM_48 = PHI <.MEM_30(16), .MEM_30(15)>
It looks like after the loop guard is added after peeling that the use for the
edge coming in from BB 15 wasn't updated.
Most likely find_guard failed. Working on it.
Odd that it only fails on x86 though.
