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 4CCC93858C50; Tue, 28 Mar 2023 15:40:09 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4CCC93858C50
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1680018009;
	bh=Ats8yeEtwMxmfCGJur2ETHIXzpnDW1AG3KlbIYKKzNY=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=xQIDo+jp1vUeT2VNOWjdIjcdAq3R6vsS8EvWL1fwA131+mz/HWwn2gh8b5tKUGvja
	 LR2tHOdiKzkUahJS8dOoF9VPPzkGcM/j+8jqdNaf6Nr4/2vYlkLrq11ManYYosYZOH
	 S+hGHWjty9/daiBzwKxDG038WVmoyndWv/fK8K7s=
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/109154] [13 regression] jump threading
 de-optimizes nested floating point comparisons
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 15:40:08 +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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub 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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-109154-4-t8Fh6IjNdi@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109154-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109154-4@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=3D109154

--- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #32)
> We could in theory expand it to look at 2 levels if its a single operand.=
..

Yeah, that would help here and could be worth it.

> which will help with some of these cases where there are casts, and keep =
the
> performance degradation from being too bad.   I'm sure there will be cases
> where a third would be handy :-P

And/or, could we go from seeing zone1_12 in an PHI arg and in that case wal=
k a
level or two or three to see if it is dependent on an SSA_NAME known to have
specific range on the edge and if so, do those range queries using that ran=
ge?=