https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50481
--- Comment #40 from Drea Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Roger Sayle from comment #36) > I'm guessing that either expanding via a paradoxical SUBREG, or a currently > missing RTL simplification (or a backend define_insn_and_split or peephole2) > should be able to remove the (I believe) unnecessary zero_extend. I would have thought maybe ext_dce might help here. Maybe it needs to be taught about bitreverse ...
