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 BBCCB385800C; Wed, 23 Aug 2023 04:45:30 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BBCCB385800C
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1692765930;
	bh=58t1ozYL6s0kSp3u6VLuK0+Fo/duFysb3AxWyoqQ5IE=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=Qx2+uTWeZgvDB8sd48QawpZh6E9/RrGiO5IlRDeTR5fTTmTjfgIMR/we8RZReAI0F
	 8MsyqoosGMqY0o6ms5X5tBvoiegzVZJgJO5KQ77NLxDsBbRmnbvxvyUcRl6p/yOZGd
	 DspRB3EnM++bMDnrjcvFEClASSUIjOmKz0ysOpkQ=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/103660] Sub-optimal code with relational
 operators
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 04:45:30 +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-103660-4-u82wI1Ps0d@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-103660-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-103660-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D103660

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Actually:
> ```
> (for (op plus bit_ior bit_xor)
>  (simplify
>   (op (cond @0 @1 integer_zero_p)
>       (cond @2 @3 integer_zero_p))
>   (with { bool wascmp; }
>    (if (bitwise_inverted_equal_p (@0, @2, wascmp))
>     (cond @0 @1 @3)
>    )
>   )
>  )
> )
> ```
> Should fix this.
>=20
> Well that replaces the pattern that was added in r13-4620-g4d9db4bdd458 a=
nd
> extends it to for plus and bit_xor.

Note I think the patterns added in that revision were incorrect:
+   (cond (cmp@0  @01 @02) @3 zerop)
+   (cond (icmp@4 @01 @02) @5 zerop))

allows for @1 and @2 (which by the way 01 and 02 is; just using base 8 rath=
er
than base 10).=