On Mon, 2023-12-11 at 09:04 +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 8:57 PM Andrew Pinski > <quic_apin...@quicinc.com> wrote: > > > > From: Andrew Pinski <apin...@marvell.com> > > > > The check for the type seems unnecessary and gets in the way > > sometimes. > > Also with a patch I am working on for match.pd, it causes a failure > > to happen. > > Before my patch the IR was: > > _1 = BIT_FIELD_REF <s, 8, 16>; > > _2 = _1 & 1; > > _3 = _2 != 0; > > _4 = (int) _3; > > __analyzer_eval (_4); > > > > Where _2 was an unsigned char type. > > And After my patch we have: > > _1 = BIT_FIELD_REF <s, 8, 16>; > > _2 = (int) _1; > > _3 = _2 & 1; > > __analyzer_eval (_3); > > > > But in this case, the BIT_AND_EXPR is in an int type. > > > > OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux-gnu with no > > regressions.
Yes... > > OK (hope it's OK that I approve this). ...and yes. Dave
