https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42117
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks|42195 |
Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I am not going to fix this.
But right now we get:
_8 = x_5(D) | y_6(D);
_4 = (unsigned int) _8;
if (_4 <= 1)
goto <bb 3>; [57.43%]
else
goto <bb 5>; [42.57%]
<bb 3> [local count: 616649929]:
if (x_5(D) != 0)
goto <bb 4>; [50.00%]
else
goto <bb 5>; [50.00%]
<bb 4> [local count: 126413234]:
_9 = y_6(D) != 0;
_1 = (int) _9;
<bb 5> [local count: 1073741824]:
# _3 = PHI <x_5(D)(3), _1(4), -1(2)>
Part of the problem is realizing y_6 is [0,1] range when looking at _9/_1.
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42195
[Bug 42195] missed xnor optimization.
