Re: [PATCH] Handle EQ_EXPR relation for operator_lshift.

2021-10-02 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 10/2/2021 1:50 PM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote: Bah. The range was being clobbered half way through the calculation. Tested on x86-64 Linux. Pushed. On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 4:52 PM Aldy Hernandez wrote: Well, after talking with Andrew it seems that X << Y being non-zero also i

Re: [PATCH] Handle EQ_EXPR relation for operator_lshift.

2021-10-02 Thread Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
Bah. The range was being clobbered half way through the calculation. Tested on x86-64 Linux. Pushed. On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 4:52 PM Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > Well, after talking with Andrew it seems that X << Y being non-zero > also implies X is non-zero. So we don't even need relationals her

Re: [PATCH] Handle EQ_EXPR relation for operator_lshift.

2021-10-01 Thread Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
Well, after talking with Andrew it seems that X << Y being non-zero also implies X is non-zero. So we don't even need relationals here. So, I leave gori relationals in his capable hands, while I test this much simpler patch which fixes the PR with no additional infrastructure ;-). Will push pend