[Bug target/106536] P9: gcc does not detect setb pattern

["segher at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106536

Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2022-09-13
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
                 CC|                            |segher at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.

GCC uses conditional branches here in expand already.  It is hard to optimise
this over that.

Using -mcpu=power10 we don't get conditional branches:

        cmpld 7,3,4      # 8    [c=4 l=4]  *cmpdi_unsigned
        li 9,1           # 43   [c=4 l=4]  *movsi_internal1/8
        cmpld 0,3,4      # 45   [c=4 l=4]  *cmpdi_unsigned
        setnbc 10,28     # 44   [c=4 l=4]  *setnbc_unsigned_si
        isel 3,9,10,1    # 46   [c=4 l=4]  isel_unsigned_si/1
        extsw 3,3        # 24   [c=4 l=4]  extendsidi2/1
        blr              # 51   [c=4 l=4]  simple_return

but this of course isn't ideal yet either.  The branches aren't fully optimised
away until ce2, which is *after* combine.  ce1 didn't catch this, perhaps
because
the two conditional assignments are a bit intertwined there?