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 B794C3959C9A; Sat, 17 Sep 2022 04:47:44 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B794C3959C9A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1663390064;
	bh=88AOqdYfJR3AyJrd976Rn7EiFUiskL7QfXnl7R5R8rU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=NlXRTuHdI0fDZMIKDceDglThjLtZj04Kh4aARzTt9jA84RWXNybgLfCf817s1buPA
	 DY8lI/yLntPpKyvmHl9QNU65hEBW4tKC0kAXPAUMY4ymokvUBpRAwRZDyH5uUOVB7G
	 +TpX9MTHqAjy9PXf3c+7dLKGKmbLKDolExDgFjhI=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/106952] Missed optimization: x < y ? x : y not lowered
 to minss
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2022 04:47:44 +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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
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 everconfirmed cf_reconfirmed_on
 cf_gcctarget
Message-ID: <bug-106952-4-0BmFypgYBJ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-106952-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-106952-4@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=3D106952

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2022-09-17
             Target|                            |x86_64-*-*

--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The main issue is that combine is confused with the more complicated setup =
and
the x86 ieee min/max patterns and on the GIMPLE level we are not forming IE=
EE
compatible .FMIN and .FMAX plus the x86 backend doesn't announce any.=