From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28460 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2012 10:41:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 28437 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2012 10:41:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:41:20 +0000 From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/53639] x86_64: redundant 64-bit operations on 32-bit integers Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:41:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Attachment #27606 is obsolete Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-06/txt/msg00674.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53639 Jakub Jelinek changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #27606|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-06-12 10:41:18 UTC --- Created attachment 27608 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27608 gcc48-pr53639.patch Unfortunately that patch regressed pr49095.c testcase. So, either we limit the splitter to the paradoxical subreg that is created by the combiner when seeing SImode and followed by zero_extend to DImode of the result (done in this patch), or we'd need to add new peepholes for the a = mem; a &= const; mem = a; if (a) cases where a &= const has been transformed into andsi_1_zext. Uros, any preference?