Hi!
On 2022-10-20T14:23:33+0200, Aldy Hernandez <al...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> I understand 'r & 3' to be logically equivalent to '(r & 2) && (r & 1)',
>> right?
>
> For r == 2, r & 3 == 2, whereas (r & 2) && (r & 1) == 0, so no?
Thanks, and now please let me crawl back under my stone, embarassing...
That'd rather be '(r & 2) || (r & 1)'.
Well, with that now clarified, how about the again updated
"Add 'gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c' [PR107195]" attached?
Have I done something stupid again re 'f4b', XFAILed?
Grüße
Thomas
-----------------
Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634
München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas
Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht
München, HRB 106955
>From 5506bd981f93e8ab1c53e8109d5be19be85d6bfa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Schwinge <tho...@codesourcery.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:10:03 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Add 'gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c' [PR107195]
... to display optimization performed as of recent
commit r13-3217-gc4d15dddf6b9eacb36f535807ad2ee364af46e04
"[PR107195] Set range to zero when nonzero mask is 0".
PR tree-optimization/107195
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c: New.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c | 129 +++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 129 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..3dc0bab0e9e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr107195-3.c
@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
+/* Inspired by 'libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/nvptx-sese-1.c'. */
+
+/* { dg-additional-options -O1 } */
+/* { dg-additional-options -fdump-tree-dom3-raw } */
+
+
+extern int
+__attribute__((const))
+foo1 (int);
+
+int f1 (int r)
+{
+ if (foo1 (r)) /* If this first 'if' holds... */
+ r *= 2; /* ..., 'r' now has a zero-value lower-most bit... */
+
+ if (r & 1) /* ..., so this second 'if' can never hold... */
+ { /* ..., so this is unreachable. */
+ /* In constrast, if the first 'if' does not hold ('foo1 (r) == 0'), the
+ second 'if' may hold, but we know ('foo1' being 'const') that
+ 'foo1 (r) == 0', so don't have to re-evaluate it here: */
+ r += foo1 (r);
+ }
+
+ return r;
+}
+/* Thus, if optimizing, we only ever expect one call of 'foo1'.
+ { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times {gimple_call <foo1,} 1 dom3 } } */
+
+
+extern int
+__attribute__((const))
+foo2 (int);
+
+int f2 (int r)
+{
+ if (foo2 (r))
+ r *= 8;
+
+ if (r & 7)
+ r += foo2 (r);
+
+ return r;
+}
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times {gimple_call <foo2,} 1 dom3 } } */
+
+
+extern int
+__attribute__((const))
+foo3 (int);
+
+int f3 (int r)
+{
+ if (foo3 (r))
+ r <<= 4;
+
+ if ((r & 64) && ((r & 8) || (r & 4) || (r & 2) || (r & 1)))
+ r += foo3 (r);
+
+ return r;
+}
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times {gimple_call <foo3,} 1 dom3 } } */
+
+
+extern int
+__attribute__((const))
+foo4 (int);
+
+int f4 (int r)
+{
+ if (foo4 (r))
+ r *= 8;
+
+ if ((r >> 1) & 2)
+ r += foo4 (r);
+
+ return r;
+}
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times {gimple_call <foo4,} 1 dom3 } } */
+
+
+extern int
+__attribute__((const))
+foo4b (int);
+
+int f4b (unsigned int r)
+{
+ if (foo4b (r))
+ r *= 8U;
+
+ if ((r / 2U) & 2U)
+ r += foo4b (r);
+
+ return r;
+}
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times {gimple_call <foo4b,} 1 dom3 { xfail *-*-* } } } */
+
+
+extern int
+__attribute__((const))
+foo5 (int);
+
+int f5 (int r) /* Works for both 'signed' and 'unsigned'. */
+{
+ if (foo5 (r))
+ r *= 2;
+
+ if ((r % 2) != 0)
+ r += foo5 (r);
+
+ return r;
+}
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times {gimple_call <foo5,} 1 dom3 } } */
+
+
+extern int
+__attribute__((const))
+foo6 (int);
+
+int f6 (unsigned int r) /* 'unsigned' is important here. */
+{
+ if (foo6 (r))
+ r *= 2;
+
+ if ((r % 2) == 1)
+ r += foo6 (r);
+
+ return r;
+}
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times {gimple_call <foo6,} 1 dom3 } } */
--
2.25.1
