On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Kai Tietz <kti...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this patch removes from gimple-fold the dead-code about
> TRUTH_AND/TRUTH_OR-expression checks.
>
> ChangeLog
>
> * gimple-fold.c (or_comparisons_1): Remove TRUTH_AND/OR
> expression handling.
> (and_var_with_comparison_1): Likewise.
>
> Bootstrapped and regression tested on host x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Ok for apply?
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Regards,
> Kai
>
> Index: gcc-head/gcc/gimple-fold.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc-head.orig/gcc/gimple-fold.c
> +++ gcc-head/gcc/gimple-fold.c
> @@ -1937,17 +1937,15 @@ and_var_with_comparison_1 (gimple stmt,
>
> /* If the definition is an AND or OR expression, we may be able to
> simplify by reassociating. */
> - if (innercode == TRUTH_AND_EXPR
> - || innercode == TRUTH_OR_EXPR
> - || (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (var)) == BOOLEAN_TYPE
> - && (innercode == BIT_AND_EXPR || innercode == BIT_IOR_EXPR)))
> + if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (var)) == BOOLEAN_TYPE
> + && (innercode == BIT_AND_EXPR || innercode == BIT_IOR_EXPR))
> {
> tree inner1 = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt);
> tree inner2 = gimple_assign_rhs2 (stmt);
> gimple s;
> tree t;
> tree partial = NULL_TREE;
> - bool is_and = (innercode == TRUTH_AND_EXPR || innercode ==
> BIT_AND_EXPR);
> + bool is_and = (innercode == BIT_AND_EXPR);
>
> /* Check for boolean identities that don't require recursive examination
> of inner1/inner2:
> @@ -2069,6 +2067,7 @@ and_comparisons_1 (enum tree_code code1,
> if (operand_equal_p (op1a, op2a, 0)
> && operand_equal_p (op1b, op2b, 0))
> {
> + /* Result will be either NULL_TREE, or a combined comparison. */
> tree t = combine_comparisons (UNKNOWN_LOCATION,
> TRUTH_ANDIF_EXPR, code1, code2,
> boolean_type_node, op1a, op1b);
> @@ -2080,6 +2079,7 @@ and_comparisons_1 (enum tree_code code1,
> if (operand_equal_p (op1a, op2b, 0)
> && operand_equal_p (op1b, op2a, 0))
> {
> + /* Result will be either NULL_TREE, or a combined comparison. */
> tree t = combine_comparisons (UNKNOWN_LOCATION,
> TRUTH_ANDIF_EXPR, code1,
> swap_tree_comparison (code2),
> @@ -2398,17 +2398,15 @@ or_var_with_comparison_1 (gimple stmt,
>
> /* If the definition is an AND or OR expression, we may be able to
> simplify by reassociating. */
> - if (innercode == TRUTH_AND_EXPR
> - || innercode == TRUTH_OR_EXPR
> - || (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (var)) == BOOLEAN_TYPE
> - && (innercode == BIT_AND_EXPR || innercode == BIT_IOR_EXPR)))
> + if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (var)) == BOOLEAN_TYPE
> + && (innercode == BIT_AND_EXPR || innercode == BIT_IOR_EXPR))
> {
> tree inner1 = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt);
> tree inner2 = gimple_assign_rhs2 (stmt);
> gimple s;
> tree t;
> tree partial = NULL_TREE;
> - bool is_or = (innercode == TRUTH_OR_EXPR || innercode == BIT_IOR_EXPR);
> + bool is_or = (innercode == BIT_IOR_EXPR);
>
> /* Check for boolean identities that don't require recursive examination
> of inner1/inner2:
> @@ -2531,6 +2529,7 @@ or_comparisons_1 (enum tree_code code1,
> if (operand_equal_p (op1a, op2a, 0)
> && operand_equal_p (op1b, op2b, 0))
> {
> + /* Result will be either NULL_TREE, or a combined comparison. */
> tree t = combine_comparisons (UNKNOWN_LOCATION,
> TRUTH_ORIF_EXPR, code1, code2,
> boolean_type_node, op1a, op1b);
> @@ -2542,6 +2541,7 @@ or_comparisons_1 (enum tree_code code1,
> if (operand_equal_p (op1a, op2b, 0)
> && operand_equal_p (op1b, op2a, 0))
> {
> + /* Result will be either NULL_TREE, or a combined comparison. */
> tree t = combine_comparisons (UNKNOWN_LOCATION,
> TRUTH_ORIF_EXPR, code1,
> swap_tree_comparison (code2),
>
