https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59968
--- Comment #22 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Bernd Buschinski from comment #21)
> Hi, I just found this old bug report. Not sure if I should ask the question
> here or open a new bug or whatever is the correct thing to do, so please
> tell me if this is the wrong place.
Patch in testing:
--cut here--
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
index e514809453d..9f6938b107c 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
@@ -19811,8 +19811,8 @@ (define_insn_and_split "*bt<mode>_setc<mode>_mask"
(match_operand:SWI48 1 "register_operand")
(const_int 1)
(subreg:QI
- (and:SWI48
- (match_operand:SWI48 2 "register_operand")
+ (and
+ (match_operand 2 "int248_register_operand")
(match_operand 3 "const_int_operand")) 0)))
(clobber (reg:CC FLAGS_REG))]
"TARGET_USE_BT
--cut here--
The patched compiler generates:
mask_get_flag:
xorl %eax, %eax
btq %rsi, %rdi
setc %al
ret
