On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 01:57:06PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > > The patch hasn't got a lot of testing yet as I'd like to hear your
> > > opinion on the patch first.
> >
> > I am testing it on powerpc. Please also test on x86?
> >
> > > gcc/ChangeLog-signextend-1
> > >
> > > * combine.c (e
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 04:32:34AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 01:39:13PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > There may be a slight imprecision in expand_compound_operation.
> > When it encounters a SIGN_EXTEND where it's already known that the
> > sign bit is zero, it may
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 01:39:13PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> There may be a slight imprecision in expand_compound_operation.
> When it encounters a SIGN_EXTEND where it's already known that the
> sign bit is zero, it may replace that with a ZERO_EXTEND (and
> tries to simplify that further). Ho
