Hi! On 2022-10-20T14:23:33+0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote: >> I understand 'r & 3' to be logically equivalent to '(r & 2) && (r & 1)', >> right? > > For r == 2, r & 3 == 2, whereas (r & 2) && (r & 1) == 0, so no? Thanks, and now please let me crawl back under my stone, embarassing... That'd rather be '(r & 2) || (r & 1)'. Well, with that now clarified, how about the again updated "Add 'gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c' [PR107195]" attached? Have I done something stupid again re 'f4b', XFAILed? Grüße Thomas ----------------- Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht München, HRB 106955