[Bug target/48297] Suboptimal optimization of boolean expression addition

[gabravier at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48297

Gabriel Ravier  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||gabravier at gmail dot com

--- Comment #3 from Gabriel Ravier  ---
We should... ? 

Also, the code generation seems to be slightly better now, though I don't think
ideal yet, but I'm not sure.

[Bug target/48297] Suboptimal optimization of boolean expression addition

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48297

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Last reconfirmed|2011-03-28 09:34:02 |2021-7-26

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
On the trunk we get:
xorl%eax, %eax
cmpl%ecx, %edi
sete%al
cmpl%esi, %ecx
sete%sil
movzbl  %sil, %esi
addl%esi, %eax
cmpl%edx, %ecx
sete%dl
movzbl  %dl, %edx
addl%edx, %eax


While clang gets:
xorl%eax, %eax
cmpl%ecx, %edi
sete%al
xorl%edi, %edi
cmpl%ecx, %esi
sete%dil
addl%eax, %edi
xorl%eax, %eax
cmpl%ecx, %edx
sete%al
addl%edi, %eax
retq
Both are still not good.
We should

[Bug target/48297] Suboptimal optimization of boolean expression addition

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48297

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |enhancement

[Bug target/48297] Suboptimal optimization of boolean expression addition

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48297

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||missed-optimization
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2011.03.28 09:34:02
  Component|c   |target
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther  2011-03-28 
09:34:02 UTC ---
Confirmed.