https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod ---
We probably do need to revisit some pass ordering. I hope to do even less
propagation within the VRPs next release, so I would expect running copyprop
afterwards would be worthwhile.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |WONTFIX
--- Comment #6 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Macleod ---
And BTW, we do this optimization, just not completely in evrp. EVRP removes
the extraneous | -128 since that is a range related action.
Constant propagation handles the propagation of the copy into the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-15
