[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2022-12-27 Thread law at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2022-12-27 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2e886eef7f2b5aadb00171af868f0895b647c3a4 commit r13-4907-g2e886eef7f2b5aadb00171af868f0895b647c3a4 Author: Raphael Moreira Zinsly Date:

[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2021-05-30 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2020-06-16 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 --- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #5) > (In reply to Mel Chen from comment #2) > > Is it possible to pretend that we have a pattern that can match xor (reg:SI > > 80), (reg: SI 72), 0xa001 in combine pass?

[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2020-06-16 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 --- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Mel Chen from comment #2) > Is it possible to pretend that we have a pattern that can match xor (reg:SI > 80), (reg: SI 72), 0xa001 in combine pass? > And then, if the constant part is too large to

[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2020-06-15 Thread wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 --- Comment #4 from Jim Wilson --- Created attachment 48737 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48737&action=edit proof of concept patch for changing xor with a large constant needs cleanup and testing to be useful

[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2020-06-15 Thread wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 --- Comment #3 from Jim Wilson --- It isn't possible to have patterns that match only in combine. If we add a pattern to accept (xor (reg) (large constant)) then it could match in any optimization pass, and could prevent us from optimizing away

[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2020-06-15 Thread bina2374 at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 --- Comment #2 from Mel Chen --- (In reply to Jim Wilson from comment #1) > We sign extend HImode constants as that is the natural thing to do to make > arithmetic work. This does mean that unsigned short logical operations need > a zero extend

[Bug target/95632] Redundant zero extension

2020-06-11 Thread wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632 Jim Wilson changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-12 Status|UNCONFIRMED