[Bug middle-end/106519] New: [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[Bug middle-end/106519] New: [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

            Bug ID: 106519
           Summary: [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in
                    gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950
           Product: gcc
           Version: 13.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: middle-end
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
                CC: tamar.christina at arm dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

On x86-64, r13-1950 caused

FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/pr96653.c (internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at
gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/pr96653.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C  -std=gnu++14 (internal compiler error: in
gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C  -std=gnu++14 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C  -std=gnu++17 (internal compiler error: in
gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C  -std=gnu++17 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C  -std=gnu++20 (internal compiler error: in
gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C  -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/make_unit.f90   -O1  (internal compiler error: in
gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/make_unit.f90   -O1  (internal compiler error: in
gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/make_unit.f90   -O1  (internal compiler error: in
gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/make_unit.f90   -O1  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/make_unit.f90   -O1  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/make_unit.f90   -O1  (test for excess errors)

with -m32.

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[seurer at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |seurer at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Seeing this on powerpc64 as well for 

FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr61346.c   -O1  (internal compiler error: in
gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr61346.c   -O1  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/make_unit.f90   -O1  (internal compiler error: in
gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/make_unit.f90   -O1  (test for excess errors)

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2022-08-03
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The condition checks that the two BBs share the same successor but forgot to
check that both BB have only one successor.

It looks like with -m32 (and powerpc) the order of the edges just happen to
match and the assert triggers.

Testing a patch overnight and will post tomorrow.

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[marxin at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> On x86-64, r13-1950 caused

Please update to the last version of git gcc-descr git alias.

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[marxin at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 106522 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P1
   Target Milestone|---                         |13.0

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[schwab@linux-m68k.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |build, ice-on-valid-code

--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> ---
This also breaks the build for m68k:

during GIMPLE pass: phiopt
xfgnulib.c: In function '__truncxfdf2':
xfgnulib.c:451:1: internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594
  451 | __truncxfdf2 (long double ld)
      | ^~~~~~~~~~~~
make[2]: *** [../../../libgcc/shared-object.mk:14: xfgnulib.o] Error 1

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina <tnfchris@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c832ec4c3ec4853ad89ff3b0dbf6e9454e75e8cc

commit r13-1963-gc832ec4c3ec4853ad89ff3b0dbf6e9454e75e8cc
Author: Tamar Christina <tamar.christina@arm.com>
Date:   Thu Aug 4 16:35:31 2022 +0100

    middle-end: Fix phi-ssa assertion triggers.  [PR106519]

    For the diamond PHI form in tree_ssa_phiopt_worker we need to
    extract edge e2 sooner.  This changes it so we extract it at the
    same time we determine we have a diamond shape.

    gcc/ChangeLog:

            PR middle-end/106519
            * tree-ssa-phiopt.cc (tree_ssa_phiopt_worker): Check final phi edge
for
            diamond shapes.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            PR middle-end/106519
            * gcc.dg/pr106519.c: New test.

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[marxin at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Is it fixed now?

[Bug middle-end/106519] [13 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4594 by r13-1950

[tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106519

Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #8 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #7)
> Is it fixed now?

Yes, should be, tested the x86 -m32 failures but the other arches should be the
same.