------- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-16 11:33 -------
Created an attachment (id=14777)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14777&action=view)
gcc43-pr34490.patch
Patch I'll be testing. For unsigned comparison, reducing the range using
num_sign_bit_copies is just wrong. If op0 is sign extended, compared using
GTU/GEU/LTU/LEU, then op0 ranges are two subranges, 0 ... 0x000..7fffff.. and
0xfff..800000.. ... 0xfff..ffffff.., so op0 could be 0, or it could be
GET_MODE_BITMASK (mode).
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34490
