https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66552
--- Comment #9 from Li Jia He <helijia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> > > (In reply to Li Jia He from comment #5)
> > > > Could we consider doing this optimization on gimple? I use the following
> > > > code on gimple to produce optimized results on powerpc64.
> > >
> > > It might make sense. But fold-const.c might not be the correct location;
> > > match.pd might be a better place for it.
> >
> > Something like:
> > (simplify
> > (rshift @0 (mod @1 integer_pow2p@2))
> > (rshift @0 (bit_and @1 (minus @1 { build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (@1), 1); }))))
>
> Some typos:
> (simplify
> (rshift @0 (mod @1 integer_pow2p@2))
> (rshift @0 (bit_and @1 (minus @2 { build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (@2), 1); }))))
>
> This would be under the for:
> (for mod (ceil_mod floor_mod round_mod trunc_mod)
Thank you for your suggestions. Let's try it on gcc11 stage1 ^ _ ^.
