https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64454
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > The reason for tree_int_cst_sgn (vr->min) >= 0 was that I don't want to let > 0 through and for negative values, handling those would require computing > absolute value, but as match.pd already folds x % -5 already into x % 5, > there is no need to bother with it, so I'm just trying to play safe. I don't think we are talking about the same thing. Restricting to positive op1 is good. What I find a little strange is: + if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (op0)) + || tree_int_cst_sgn (vr->min) >= 0 + || tree_int_cst_lt (fold_unary (NEGATE_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (op1), op1), + vr->min)) where condition 2: min>=0 is more restrictive than condition 3: min>-op1 (since op1 is known to be positive) so we could skip condition 2.
