[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-18 18:50 --- > It's not PR24427 that's the motivation for this backport, but PR 28173. > In fact, it was *your* request in comment #2 of PR28173 to backport this! Well, I only requested that you comment on the proposed backport. And this was on 2006-09-13, so 5 months ago! > I'm a little disappointed you'd even question my decision/authority to > backport a regression fix. :-) I'm basically paid for that. :-) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #10 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2007-02-18 18:10 --- Hi Eric, It's not PR24427 that's the motivation for this backport, but PR 28173. In fact, it was *your* request in comment #2 of PR28173 to backport this! I'm a little disappointed you'd even question my decision/authority to backport a regression fix. :-) Roger -- -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-18 17:58 --- Roger, I'm a little puzzled by your last move: is it really necessary to backport a patch for a missed optimization, after a delay of 1 full year, to a branch which is supposed to be in stabilization mode now? IMHO it's too late. -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sayle at gcc dot gnu dot ||org, ebotcazou at gcc dot ||gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #8 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-18 17:10 --- Subject: Bug 24427 Author: sayle Date: Sun Feb 18 17:10:19 2007 New Revision: 122100 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122100 Log: Backport from mainline. PR middle-end/24427 PR rtl-optimization/28173 * fold-const.c (fold_binary) : Transform (X&C1)|C2 into (X,C2) if C1 is a subset of the bits of C2. Transform (X&C1)|C2 into X|C2 if C1|C2 == ~0. Canonicalize (X&C1)|C2 as (X&(C1&~C2))|C2. : Canonicalize (X|C1)&C2 as (X&C2)|(C1&C2). * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/andor-1.c: New test case. Added: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/andor-1.c Modified: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fold-const.c branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-13 04:08 --- (In reply to comment #6) > Isn't this a duplicate of PR 28173 now? Besides PR 28173 is a regression. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #6 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-09-13 04:02 --- Isn't this a duplicate of PR 28173 now? -- bangerth at dealii dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bangerth at dealii dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #5 from ramana dot radhakrishnan at codito dot com 2006-06-26
19:13 ---
This should be reopened. A related testcase shows a regression from 3.4.6 to
4.1.1 for m68k-elf shows a regression . combine used to take care of this in
3.4.6 . A backport of the patch is ready with me. If its allowed, I'll put it
up .
This is the test case .
#include
int i;
int main (void)
{
if ( ((i & ~1) | 1) != ( i | 1))
printf ("abc");
}
3.4.6 generated
.file "fail.c"
.text
.align 2
.globl foo
.type foo, @function
foo:
link.w %a6,#0
unlk %a6
rts
.size foo, .-foo
.comm i,4,2
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 3.4.6"
4.1.2 pre-release generates
.file "fail.c"
.section.rodata.str1.1,"aMS",@progbits,1
.LC0:
.string "abc"
.text
.align 2
.globl main
.type main, @function
main:
link.w %fp,#0
move.l %d2,-(%sp)
move.l i,%d1
moveq #-2,%d0
and.l %d1,%d0
moveq #1,%d2
or.l %d2,%d0
or.l %d2,%d1
cmp.l %d0,%d1
jbeq .L5
pea .LC0
jbsr printf
addq.l #4,%sp
.L5:
move.l -4(%fp),%d2
unlk %fp
rts
.size main, .-main
.comm i,4,2
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 4.1.2 20060623 (prerelease)"
--
ramana dot radhakrishnan at codito dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana dot radhakrishnan at
||codito dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #4 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-02-14 03:07 --- This has now been fixed on mainline. -- roger at eyesopen dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #3 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-13 18:33 --- Subject: Bug 24427 Author: sayle Date: Mon Feb 13 18:33:32 2006 New Revision: 110918 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110918 Log: PR middle-end/24427 * fold-const.c (fold_binary) : Transform (X&C1)|C2 into (X,C2) if C1 is a subset of the bits of C2. Transform (X&C1)|C2 into X|C2 if C1|C2 == ~0. Canonicalize (X&C1)|C2 as (X&(C1&~C2))|C2. : Canonicalize (X|C1)&C2 as (X&C2)|(C1&C2). * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/andor-1.c: New test case. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/andor-1.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fold-const.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-19 10:25 --- fold-const.c:distribute_bit_expr should be extended to handle this case. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
[Bug middle-end/24427] missing optimization opportunity with binary operators
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-18 13:42 --- Confirmed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||19987 nThis|| Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|tree-optimization |middle-end Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Keywords||missed-optimization Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-10-18 13:42:23 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24427
