Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2006-11-19 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot |

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2006-11-17 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-18 01:27 --- Shouldn't this be fixed by Roger Sayle's recent fold-const.c patch? -- steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2006-11-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-18 01:34 --- (In reply to comment #8) Shouldn't this be fixed by Roger Sayle's recent fold-const.c patch? No, in fact the generic (the one where 2 is turned into a variable) is not optimized either. -- pinskia at gcc dot

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2006-11-15 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- Bug 9814 depends on bug 29797, which changed state. Bug 29797 Summary: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Miscompiles bit test / set in OpenOffice http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29797 What|Old Value |New Value

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2006-11-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||29797 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9814 --- You

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2006-09-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2006-03-01 02:52:10 |2006-09-17 09:19:25 date||

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2006-02-28 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||TREE Last reconfirmed|2005-09-07 17:40:17 |2006-03-01

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2005-12-06 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-07 03:12 --- Once fold does (ab)!=0?a|b:a to a and PR 25290 is fixed then this will be caught at the tree level. There are most likely others like this too. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2005-05-26 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-27 02:46 --- Subject: Bug 9814 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-27 02:46:01 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog ifcvt.c

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2005-05-26 Thread roger at eyesopen dot com
--- Additional Comments From roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-05-27 02:55 --- This optimization is now performed at the RTL-level, but it would be nice if this (and several other of ifcvt.c's noce_try_foo optimizations) could be caught earlier during tree-ssa. -- What

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2005-05-22 Thread roger at eyesopen dot com
--- Additional Comments From roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-05-22 19:25 --- I posted a patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg01956.html to implement this in the RTL optimizers. Better to get it linked to the PR, than slip through the cracks. The proposed change to

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2005-01-23 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-23 15:25 --- This is a NOP for me on AMD64 but not on i686. -- What|Removed |Added GCC host

Bug#181096: [Bug tree-optimization/9814] gcc fails to optimise if (l2) l|=2 away

2005-01-23 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet|ix86| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9814 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You