On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 11:34:01AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> Shouldn't we simply use gen_int_mode?
You're right, that is shorter. So like this?
BTW, looking at gen_int_mode, wouldn't it be better to add an overload
for HOST_WIDE_INT first argument so that it wouldn't need to go through
poly_int? Or would that then be ambiguous with int, unsigned etc.
arguments?
2020-12-10 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
PR rtl-optimization/98229
* optabs.c (expand_doubleword_mod): Canonicalize op1 and
1 - INTVAL (op1) as word_mode constants when used in
word_mode arithmetics.
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr98229.c: New test.
--- gcc/optabs.c.jj 2020-12-11 00:30:41.892272376 +0100
+++ gcc/optabs.c 2020-12-11 11:51:15.902855312 +0100
@@ -1081,7 +1081,8 @@ expand_doubleword_mod (machine_mode mode
return NULL_RTX;
}
}
- rtx remainder = expand_divmod (1, TRUNC_MOD_EXPR, word_mode, sum, op1,
+ rtx remainder = expand_divmod (1, TRUNC_MOD_EXPR, word_mode, sum,
+ gen_int_mode (INTVAL (op1), word_mode),
NULL_RTX, 1, OPTAB_DIRECT);
if (remainder == NULL_RTX)
return NULL_RTX;
@@ -1099,7 +1100,8 @@ expand_doubleword_mod (machine_mode mode
return NULL_RTX;
}
mask = expand_simple_binop (word_mode, AND, mask,
- GEN_INT (1 - INTVAL (op1)),
+ gen_int_mode (1 - INTVAL (op1),
+ word_mode),
NULL_RTX, 1, OPTAB_DIRECT);
if (mask == NULL_RTX)
return NULL_RTX;
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr98229.c.jj 2020-12-11
11:49:34.518993120 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr98229.c 2020-12-11
11:49:34.517993131 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+/* PR rtl-optimization/98229 */
+
+unsigned long long
+foo (unsigned long long x)
+{
+ return x % ~0U;
+}
Jakub
