[Bug tree-optimization/96695] Failure to optimize combination of pointer comparison to nullptr and another pointer

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96695

--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski <pins...@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:58f1e185ff6d108171b9c8ea043796c85a65fcec

commit r14-3014-g58f1e185ff6d108171b9c8ea043796c85a65fcec
Author: Andrew Pinski <apin...@marvell.com>
Date:   Sat Aug 5 09:23:26 2023 -0700

    MATCH: Extend min_value/max_value to pointer types

    Since we already had the infrastructure to optimize
    `(x == 0) && (x > y)` to false for integer types,
    this extends the same to pointer types as indirectly
    requested by PR 96695.

    OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux-gnu with no regressions.

    gcc/ChangeLog:

            PR tree-optimization/96695
            * match.pd (min_value, max_value): Extend to
            pointer types too.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            PR tree-optimization/96695
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-1.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-10.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-11.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-12.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-2.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-3.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-4.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-5.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-6.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-7.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-8.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/pr96695-9.c: New test.