public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "vanyacpp at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/98709] New: gcc optimizes bitwise operations, but doesn't optimize logical ones
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 01:31:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-98709-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98709

            Bug ID: 98709
           Summary: gcc optimizes bitwise operations, but doesn't optimize
                    logical ones
           Product: gcc
           Version: 10.2.1
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: middle-end
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: vanyacpp at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

GCC 10.2 produces very good code for this function noticing that both sides of
conjuntion are the same:

unsigned foo_bitwise(unsigned a, unsigned b)
{
    return (~a ^ b) & ~(a ^ b);
}

foo_bitwise(unsigned int, unsigned int):
        xor     edi, esi
        mov     eax, edi
        not     eax
        ret

But when I write a similar function with logical operations it doesn't notice
that:

bool foo_logical(bool a, bool b)
{
    return (!a ^ b) & !(a ^ b);
}

foo_logical(bool, bool):
        mov     eax, esi
        xor     eax, edi
        xor     eax, 1
        cmp     dil, sil
        sete    dl
        and     eax, edx
        ret

I believe that in a similar manner it can be optimized to something like this:

foo_logical(bool, bool):
        xor     edi, esi
        mov     eax, edi
        xor     eax, 1
        ret

             reply	other threads:[~2021-01-17  1:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-17  1:31 vanyacpp at gmail dot com [this message]
2021-01-17 17:34 ` [Bug middle-end/98709] " glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-08-01 18:17 ` [Bug tree-optimization/98709] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-08-10 11:46 ` vanyacpp at gmail dot com
2022-10-22  2:13 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-98709-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).