https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112406
--- Comment #19 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #18) > Already in ifcvt we have: > > _ifc__60 = .COND_ADD (_2, _6, MADPictureC1_lsm.10_25, > MADPictureC1_lsm.10_25); > > which we should not. This is similar on riscv. > > But during value numbering it still is > > Value numbering stmt = _ifc__60 = .COND_ADD (_47, MADPictureC1_lsm.10_25, > _6, MADPictureC1_lsm.10_25); > > so we originally created the right thing. > Hmm, no simplification is happening. Is there still a swap somewhere that > should not be? ADD is commutative, so commutative_op declares COND_ADD as commutative and the first commutative operand starts at op1. So swapping _6 and MADPictureC1_lsm.10_25 should be legal to do. Are you depending on a specific order?
