Re: [PATCH] i386: Fix up *jcc_bt*_mask{,_1} [PR111408]

2023-11-25 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 8:19 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Hi! > > The following testcase is miscompiled in GCC 14 because the > *jcc_bt_mask and *jcc_bt_mask_1 patterns have just > one argument in (match_operator 0 "bt_comparison_operator" [...]) > but as bt_comparison_operator is eq,ne, we need tw

[PATCH] i386: Fix up *jcc_bt*_mask{,_1} [PR111408]

2023-11-24 Thread Jakub Jelinek
Hi! The following testcase is miscompiled in GCC 14 because the *jcc_bt_mask and *jcc_bt_mask_1 patterns have just one argument in (match_operator 0 "bt_comparison_operator" [...]) but as bt_comparison_operator is eq,ne, we need two. The md readers don't warn about it, after all, some checks can b