https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61328
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Oh I think I see. When I wrote find_bswap_or_nop_load () I assumed that it
would only return in find_bswap_or_nop_1 as called in the GIMPLE_UNARY_RHS
case. It seems I was wrong.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61328
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #0)
> Maybe
>
> if (!source_expr2)
> return NULL_TREE;
>
> if (n1.size != n2.size)
> return NULL_TREE;
>
> would be better code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61328
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #1)
> *facepalm*
>
> Yes indeed. Does this qualify for an obvious fix as per commiting rules?
Yes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61328
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
*facepalm*
Yes indeed. Does this qualify for an obvious fix as per commiting rules?
