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 A4A5F385840F; Wed,  6 Apr 2022 08:45:19 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A4A5F385840F
From: "vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/31178] VRP can infer a range for b in a >> b
 and a << b
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 08:45:19 +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: 4.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: easyhack, missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-31178-4-3PwpINUzpg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-31178-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-31178-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 08:45:19 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D31178

--- Comment #19 from Vincent Lef=C3=A8vre <vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net> -=
--
(In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #18)
> Sure, if that's what the precision is used for.  The message from Andrew
> sounded like 'I want the precision for the shift operand but let me
> just use that of the shifted anyway'

Andrew should clarify. From what I understand, he does not want the precisi=
on
for the shift operand (right operand), but an upper bound (this is what this
bug is about). And this upper bound is deduced from the precision of the
shifted element (promoted left operand).=