[Bug target/105554] [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE: in emit_block_move_hints, at expr.cc:1829 since r9-5509-g5928bc2ec06dd4e7

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105554

--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
A lot of ipa passes use push_cfun:
grep push_cfun ipa*.cc
ipa-fnsummary.cc:       push_cfun (DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (node->decl));
ipa-fnsummary.cc:  push_cfun (DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (node->decl));
ipa-modref.cc:      push_cfun (f);
ipa-modref.cc:  push_cfun (DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (node->decl));
ipa-modref.cc:  push_cfun (DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (node->decl));
ipa-prop.cc:  push_cfun (func);
ipa-pure-const.cc:  push_cfun (DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (decl));
ipa-sra.cc:      push_cfun (DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (node->decl));
ipa-sra.cc:       push_cfun (fun);
ipa-utils.cc:      push_cfun (dstcfun);
ipa-visibility.cc:            push_cfun (DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION
(e->caller->decl));
ipa-visibility.cc:                    push_cfun (DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION
(e->caller->decl));
After all, even create_target_clone -> create_version_clone_with_body ->
tree_function_versioning already called and and then pop_cfun () again.
multiple-target.cc is something so seldom used that another push_cfun/pop_cfun
around the newly proposed loop wouldn't be that bad.