https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103194
--- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #15) > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #13) > > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #8) > > > unsigned long pscc_a_2_3; > > > int pscc_a_1_4; > > > unsigned long pc2; > > > void pscc(int n) > > > { > > > long mask = 1ll << n; > > > pc2 = __sync_fetch_and_or(&pscc_a_2_3, mask) & mask; > > > } > > > > > > void pscc1(int n) > > > { > > > long mask = 1ll << 65; > > > pc2 = __sync_fetch_and_or(&pscc_a_2_3, mask) & mask; > > > } > > > > > > pscc and pscc1 have different behavior when n >= 64, It seems unsafe to > > > optimize variable mask? > > > > Is the behavior well defined for n >= 64? I got > > > > foo.c:11:19: warning: left shift count >= width of type > > [-Wshift-count-overflow] > > 11 | long mask = 1ll << 65; > > | ^~ > According to C99 > The result of E1 << E2 is E1 left-shifted E2 bit positions; vacated bits are > filled with zeros. If E1 has an unsigned type, the value of the result is E1 > × 2E2, reduced modulo one more than the maximum value representable in the > result type. If E1 has a signed type and nonnegative value, and E1 × 2E2 is > representable in the result type, then that is the resulting value; > otherwise, the behavior is undefined. > > So yes, it's well defined, and the result is zero. This is the existing behavior since GCC 7.