From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 40A953857815; Sat,  5 Jun 2021 01:21:42 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 40A953857815
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/100864] (a&!b) | b is not opimized to a | b
 for comparisons
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 01:21:42 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-100864-4-qsEoQdd0jw@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-100864-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-100864-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 01:21:42 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100864

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> You can possibly merge it with the
That is where I put it already, the ... was actually that part. Obviously t=
his
was not a patch just showing what was done.

>=20
> by using sth like logical_inverted_value (you want bit_inverted_value),
>=20
> Also you don't need
>=20
>  (for cmp (tcc_comparison)
>   (for icmp (tcc_comparison)
>=20
> but just
>=20
>   (for cmp (tcc_comparison)
>        icmp (inverted_tcc_comparison)
>        ncmp (inverted_tcc_comparison_with_nans))
>     ...
>    (if (ic =3D=3D icmp || ic =3D=3D ncmp)
> ...
>=20
> right?

Does not work as there would be many of the same patterns with the above for
loop as inverted_tcc_comparison and inverted_tcc_comparison_with_nans have a
non empty intersection. The reason why it worked for the other usage of
inverted_tcc_comparison/inverted_tcc_comparison_with_nans is because it was=
 the
resulting pattern rather than the matching pattern.=