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 3A93B3858039; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 05:42:02 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3A93B3858039
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/101116] missed peephole optimization not of bitwise and
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 05:42:02 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-101116-4-13V0uRTRLR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-101116-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-101116-4@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: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 05:42:02 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D101116

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Take:
unsigned char foo(unsigned *i) {
    return !(*i & 1);
}

GCC and clang/LLVM produce similar code.  In fact similar to what GCC produ=
ces
before.

Note also ICC produces the same code as GCC for original case.  So does
Microsoft compiler.  So I think we can say this is not a missed optimization
for GCC.=