public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/102705] [12 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 since r12-2637-g145bc41dae7c7bfa093d61e77346f98e6a595a0e Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 09:18:56 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-102705-4-45LuCELDo9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-102705-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102705 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- so it's _10 == _10 ^ 1 vs. (short) _2 == (short)(((char) _2) ^ 1) likely simplified using logical_inverted_value which works fine for the first but not the second form. We're now doing more simplification (looking through some extra conversions), but that prevents this pattern from matching. By the time we compute the ranges necessary the conversions are already pickled too far before simplifying the conditional. Handling possible variants with patterns is a bit difficult, instead what looks necessary here is some sort of symbolic equivalence processing that would include bit ops so it tracks that _6 is _2 and _22 is _2 ^ 1. What would also help here is simplifying # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 _2 = 1 >> b.1_1; # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 iftmp.0_10 = (char) _2; # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 _4 = iftmp.0_10 ^ 1; # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 _5 = (int) _4; # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 iftmp.6_22 = (short int) _5; via ((char)_2) ^ 1 -> (char)(_2 ^ 1) though we generally do not widen ops. Which means doing it one level more outer at (int)((char) _2) ^ 1) -> _2 ^ 1 which is possible because the truncation is a no-op. That could be applied to all bit ops when we have range info on the non-constant operand for the case where the wider type fits in a GPR.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-19 9:18 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-10-12 13:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102705] New: [12 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 (trunk vs 11.2.0) theodort at inf dot ethz.ch 2021-10-12 13:51 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102705] [12 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 since r12-2637-g145bc41dae7c7bfa093d61e77346f98e6a595a0e marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-10-13 6:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-10-13 19:25 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2022-01-19 9:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-05-06 8:31 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102705] [12/13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-10-19 9:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-08 12:22 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102705] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-21 7:00 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-102705-4-45LuCELDo9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).