https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107699

--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Another missed optimization:
  long unsigned int _8;
...
  _1 = _8 * 4;
  if (_1 != 0)
    goto <bb 3>; [70.00%]
  else
    goto <bb 88>; [30.00%]

  <bb 3> [local count: 751619365]:
  _2 = &data._M_elems + _1;
  _304 = (long int) _1;
  _13 = _304 /[ex] 4;
  __n.0_14 = (long unsigned int) _13;
  if (__n.0_14 == 0)
    goto <bb 4>; [21.72%]
  else
    goto <bb 5>; [78.28%]
```

__n.0_14 is just _1.

I am not sure if this will remove the warning though.

Reply via email to