[Bug tree-optimization/27504] x && (x & y) not optimized to x & y

2023-10-12 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27504 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/27504] x && (x & y) not optimized to x & y

2023-10-12 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27504 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #5 from Andrew

[Bug tree-optimization/27504] x && (x & y) not optimized to x & y

2023-05-05 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27504 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Confirmed again. > So looking at the IR, it took until PHI-OPT4 to be able to convert it into: >[local count: 1073741824]: > if (x_3(D) != 0) > goto ;

[Bug tree-optimization/27504] x && (x & y) not optimized to x & y

2021-06-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27504 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2012-01-04 00:00:00 |2021-6-2 --- Comment #3 from Andrew

[Bug tree-optimization/27504] x (x y) not optimized to x y

2006-05-09 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-09 06:20 --- Confirmed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/27504] x (x y) not optimized to x y

2006-05-09 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-09 08:36 --- It get's a little complicated as fold gets (xD.1520 != 0) ((xD.1520 85) != 0) from the frontend. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27504