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 DCDA23858D35; Wed, 15 May 2024 10:37:47 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org DCDA23858D35
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1715769467;
	bh=NYxBnzXmIwmX3iy+K7gYSuxSAbnnF6OgUlN5m8eWkL8=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=UgG+n7GNY7FuOeYwaR9su9OY9x+OWkKkS6ndFIriKuLaGWUBelkrmCu//WXNM7uhe
	 S+LjiJxgz8Xwql0pK5mEoeFPdabL9y7vsnhmSrBlKvELH3/hDJC0y52Wnc0+WwbmTa
	 f2URrnJw4DZtEtxXHYwwyS6SHBjtkVAOwgk6l2j8=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/115086] bic is not used when the non-not part is a
 constant
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 10:37:47 +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: 15.0
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-115086-4-NNIMcAupls@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-115086-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-115086-4@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=3D115086

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> So looking into this a little bit. There are many different patterns which
> might need to be fixed. Maybe there is a better way of implementing this
> into forwprop. Let see if that is doable. But that won't be until next we=
ek.

I have a better idea than forwprop which I mentioned in a different bug rep=
ort.
Basically add an andnot optab and expand using that if we can match it. the
open question is should we add an internal function and match it in
isel/math-opt pass and expand the internal function that way or add the cod=
e to
expand to match it. Either way the optab will be the same.=20

Note that will fix even the pull the constant out of the loop issue too.=