On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 9:11 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc-patches
<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> In gimple_expand_vec_cond_expr:
>
> icode = get_vcond_icode (mode, cmp_op_mode, unsignedp);
> if (icode == CODE_FOR_nothing)
> {
> if (tcode == LT_EXPR
> && op0a == op0)
> {
> /* A VEC_COND_EXPR condition could be folded from EQ_EXPR/NE_EXPR
> into a constant when only get_vcond_eq_icode is supported.
> Try changing it to NE_EXPR. */
> tcode = NE_EXPR;
> }
> if ((tcode == EQ_EXPR || tcode == NE_EXPR)
> && direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_VCONDEQ, TREE_TYPE (lhs),
> TREE_TYPE (op0a),
> OPTIMIZE_FOR_BOTH))
> {
> tree tcode_tree = build_int_cst (integer_type_node, tcode);
> return gimple_build_call_internal (IFN_VCONDEQ, 5, op0a, op0b, op1,
> op2, tcode_tree);
> }
> }
>
> if (icode == CODE_FOR_nothing)
> {
> gcc_assert (VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (op0))
> && can_compute_op0
> && (get_vcond_mask_icode (mode, TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (op0)))
> != CODE_FOR_nothing));
> return gimple_build_call_internal (IFN_VCOND_MASK, 3, op0, op1, op2);
> }
>
> It seems the second check for icode == COND_FOR_nothing is redundant,
> since icode is not reassigned in the previous block ?
> The attached patch removes the second if condition.
> OK to commit after bootstrap+test ?
>
OK.
> Thanks,
> Prathamesh
