[Bug target/107209] [13 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: statement marked for throw, but doesn't)

["ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107209

--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Looking at other backends, rs6000 uses in *gimple_fold_builtin gsi_replace
> (..., true);
> all the time, ix86 gsi_replace (..., false); all the time, alpha with true,
> aarch64 with true.  But perhaps what is more important if the builtins
> folded are declared nothrow or not, if they are nothrow, then they shouldn't
> have any EH edges at the start already and so it shouldn't matter what is
> used.

The vmulx_f64 intrinsic is not marked "nothrow" by the logic:
1284 static tree
1285 aarch64_get_attributes (unsigned int f, machine_mode mode)
1286 {
1287   tree attrs = NULL_TREE;
1288
1289   if (!aarch64_modifies_global_state_p (f, mode))
1290     {
1291       if (aarch64_reads_global_state_p (f, mode))
1292         attrs = aarch64_add_attribute ("pure", attrs);
1293       else
1294         attrs = aarch64_add_attribute ("const", attrs);
1295     }
1296
1297   if (!flag_non_call_exceptions || !aarch64_could_trap_p (f, mode))
1298     attrs = aarch64_add_attribute ("nothrow", attrs);
1299
1300   return aarch64_add_attribute ("leaf", attrs);
1301 }

aarch64_could_trap_p returns true for it as it can raise an FP exception.
Should that affect the nothrow attribute though? Shouldn't that be for C++
exceptions only?