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 4CCC23858C31; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 02:52:58 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4CCC23858C31
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1698288778;
	bh=/Mv/g0T2fVM/9cAv8Nb1XjbNIvcjhc1TXTRB2Njc4ow=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=Z0rZl+dEBfRafOylpxpZ9i+Lx2KAZEiUMdmHErfg+sZsugpXnCko5kl7RSgblCjPo
	 3iB8VNYwQUman/3Nih1n3sjU8giYZlD9Tzf6d1YrslDKPDZscWbA/1fTduC92NSOsQ
	 uUDg87IPKNIv9n0SRhAKBP1/j0rYNu6cl2jWtTRY=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/112093] (X & Y) < X (unsigned) and (X & Y) !=
 X should produce the same code
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 02:52:57 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: see_also
Message-ID: <bug-112093-4-G1uHYCASB5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-112093-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-112093-4@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=3D112093

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           See Also|                            |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
                   |                            |a/show_bug.cgi?id=3D101590

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
| has a similar issue:
```
int f_or(unsigned a, unsigned b)
{
        return (a|b) <=3D a;
}

int f1_or(unsigned a, unsigned b)
{
        return (a|b) =3D=3D a;
}

int g_or(unsigned a, unsigned b)
{
        return (a|b) > a;
}

int g1_or(unsigned a, unsigned b)
{
        return (a|b) !=3D a;
}
```

Note for other comparisons, see PR 101590 which I am about to submit a patch
for since they simplify down to a constant.=