https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=124019
--- Comment #6 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #5) > Then that's a target issue HP. > > From a canonicalization standpoint Andrew's approach is sound and checking > RTX costs is inappropriate here as we're in gimple and very much want to > avoid introducing those kinds of target dependencies into gimple. Thus the argument that "X is always more expensive than Y for all targets" is also inappropriate (as well as incorrect here, for X=shift and Y=and), leaving the canonicalization argument standing. I'll buy that.
