https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108370
--- Comment #3 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
We don't want to do:
return ((unsigned int) bio->bi_flags >> bit & 1) != 0;
if we can avoid it as "bit" is usually constant - though I'm guessing the
optimiser should handle that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108371
Bug ID: 108371
Summary: gcc for x86_64 may sign/zero extent arguments
unnecessarily
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108370
Bug ID: 108370
Summary: gcc doesn't merge bitwise-AND if an explicit
comparison against 0 is given
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
Bug ID: 8
Summary: Unnecessary jump instruction
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
Bug ID: 7
Summary: Missed optimisation with -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
