https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96244
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu <crazylht at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > so range-info is one index too pessimistic here. So IMHO it's not about > "redundant" masked loads, it's about the fact that we end up with loads > at all here. If c and d would not be register arguments we would have to > perform loads and if they might trap we could not elide the masked load. compared to masked load, load seems to be be more probably eliminated by backend for this situation.
