https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120360
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5f4e794fd3efb0e44a6b5afdead95033df69c41b
commit r16-815-g5f4e794fd3efb0e44a6b5afdead95033df69c41b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120360
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That is hack to avoid emitting constants that match the endbr64 or endbr32
instructions in the immediates. Normally that is done when checking the
immediates, but here they are negated and I didn't want to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120360
--- Comment #5 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
>
> Untested fix for #c2/#c3. We already had *cmp_minus_1 pattern which
> handles the case where result of subtraction is used solely in comparison
> against ze
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120360
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 61480
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61480&action=edit
gcc16-pr120360.patch
Untested fix for #c2/#c3. We already had *cmp_minus_1 pattern which
handles the case whe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120360
--- Comment #3 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Linus Torvalds from comment #2)
>
> Stupid test-case:
Actually, that was a bit *too* stupid, since it doesn't show the effect of "we
still need the original value afterwards".
So change it to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120360
--- Comment #2 from Linus Torvalds ---
Btw, for a similar - but different - comparison optimization failure case, we
had a discussion about our error pointer comparisons in the kernel.
We have this model where we return a pointer or error code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120360
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
