On Mon, 2025-11-10 at 17:52 +0800, mengqinggang wrote: > "uint64_t a & 0xffffffff" expands to two and:SI with -O0: > > (insn 8 7 9 (set (subreg:SI (reg:DI 82 [ a_2 ]) 0) > (and:SI (reg:SI 83) > (const_int -1 [0xffffffffffffffff]))) "t.c":3:5 -1
IMO this insn is bogus in the first place. It should be just (set ... (reg:SI 83)) instead. Maybe caused by a bug I created unintentionally... Could you figure out which code path generated this insn? -- Xi Ruoyao <[email protected]>
