From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 26A7E3858C42; Mon,  8 Jan 2024 10:16:21 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 26A7E3858C42
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1704708981;
	bh=zzW8K0NoXybb7PW8JEJfNFQm3XaJD55tPaZ4VVhATEA=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=uygviB8/L5Uasm/zY4QRYcLpoCOx4zFKfTORwnqF8JRyAqbGw10RmBTOXpJ8M9Owk
	 TPw3hIoBgF3LoTMNHaCqdPPemR3ZVqydqXqMn2IAEsSj9VSKfWn65Nyy1xcRo1aHLV
	 U/d/u8B82mEqSpwYnsxOp29djvxtnLdb2xGvCdH8=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/113210] [14 Regression] ICE: tree check:
 expected integer_cst, have cond_expr in get_len, at tree.h:6481
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2024 10:16:20 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113210-4-s9GAyy1hcD@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113210-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113210-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D113210

--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> > That is, another fix might be to adjust NITERSM1 to NITERS - 1 when
> > NITERS went constant ...  (btw, I want to get rid of _NITERS and only
>=20
> Or we could only use fold_build2 for the PLUS_EXPR 1 computation if NITER=
SM1
> is INTEGER_CST, otherwise use build2...

I think we should see where the original expression is built but not folded=
.=